Article

2014-09-13 -Short Attention Span Theater-

Attempts To Make Same Sex Marriage About Homosexuality Proving Fruitless?

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by charger 2014-09-13 00:00|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 Fruitless? Restrained grin and golf clap.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-09-13 01:27|| 2014-09-13 01:27|| Front Page Top

#2 good one !!

Posted by Mikey Hunt 2014-09-13 02:12|| 2014-09-13 02:12|| Front Page Top

#3 There was always a deep element of the process to garner the economic benefits government extended, both directly and indirectly, to married people. Eliminate those subsidizes and a lot of wind would have gone out of the push for same sex marriage.

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-09-13 09:49|| 2014-09-13 09:49|| Front Page Top

#4 The "marriage subsidy" has some historic, real & practical benefits, which best serve the future generations. If you doubt that, go talk to the classical Spartans about their fates.
I love this bit from the article "McIntosh said the wedding was not mocking the institution of marriage." Not mocking the institution of marriage any more than gay marriage does.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2014-09-13 11:20|| 2014-09-13 11:20|| Front Page Top

#5 The historic subsidies tended to focus on procreation, ie future taxpayers. Somewhere along the route, that key aspect was wrapped up in hearth and home (material acquisition for hierarchical social positioning) vs offsprings.

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-09-13 11:51|| 2014-09-13 11:51|| Front Page Top

#6 The desire of human beings for material gain and social position is almost as fundamental as that for procreation. But without a future generation, the other desires won't matter at all in 100+- years.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2014-09-13 12:44|| 2014-09-13 12:44|| Front Page Top

#7 ROLOL. Difficult to recover and get serious after reading that! :)

Posted by JohnQC 2014-09-13 14:47|| 2014-09-13 14:47|| Front Page Top

#8 Anguper Hupomosing9418

Yes unless subsidized by taxing people, people wouldn't have sex.

What are you going to come up with next?

I think we should subsidize speedboat owners. Think of the Harbours? Without it we may not have any ports!

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2014-09-13 18:59|| 2014-09-13 18:59|| Front Page Top

23:54 Tlbnozmg
23:40 Mujbvioj
23:23 Pappy
22:45 SteveS
22:29 trailing wife
21:58 Frank G
21:45 Barbara
21:20 SteveS
21:09 Jerkface Killa
21:07 Thing From Snowy Mountain
21:04 Frank G
20:38 OldSpook
20:37 Old Patriot
20:32 OldSpook
20:08 trailing wife
19:57 trailing wife
19:03 Herman Munster
19:03 AlmostAnonymous5839
18:59 Bright Pebbles
18:55 mom
18:38 3dc
17:48 Besoeker
17:39 swksvolFF
17:22 phil_b