Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rand Paul: Letís get marriage out of the tax code
Hotair ^ | 03/14/2013 | AllahPundit

Posted on 03/14/2013 7:41:29 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-178 next last

1 posted on 03/14/2013 7:41:29 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Rand Paul: Let’s get marriage out of the tax code

I'd rather see the Patriot Act brought up, discussed, and recinded. It has bred a police state.

2 posted on 03/14/2013 7:46:44 AM PDT by Zuben Elgenubi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The problem is that, it is not what the gay agenda wants....They want to force every institution, to consider gay marriages on par with heterosexual ones, and force religious institutions to give them equal weighting, and they will not stop until they get it.

You give them an inch, and they’ll take a mile.


3 posted on 03/14/2013 7:50:29 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
At the core of the anti-SSM argument, as I understand it, is the belief that man/woman marriage is qualitatively different from gay unions; barring gays from marrying under state law is a way to recognize that difference

Apparently, Allah Pundit doesn't understand the core of the conservative argument against same sex marriage.

1. Same sex marriage will make our culture more dangerous.

2. Heterosexual marriage is potentially procreative. Homosexual marriage never is. The state has an interest in the best arrangement for rearing children; it has none in who you get your jollies with.

3. Children have a right to be raised by their own mother and father.

4. The above means that if you allow the word "marriage" to cover anything, then eventually reality will force you to come up with a new word so you can distinguish those relationships that are potentially procreative.

4 posted on 03/14/2013 7:51:25 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

#3. is your most powerful argument in today’s society, but I’m intrigued by #1. Can you elaborate and provide details?


5 posted on 03/14/2013 8:06:13 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I agree with Paul on this.
Who will play Solomon and ask the state to exit the sacrament business? The State has no business in the Church’s business.
Though, we here know that the radical agenda of “Progressives” is to force the Church by law to accept homosexuality as normal. They mean to rewrite the Holy Script. What will be left of Judeao-Christian doctrine then but a Success for the Left?


6 posted on 03/14/2013 8:08:59 AM PDT by griswold3 (Big Government does not tolerate rivals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The fundamental problem conservatives have is not expressing the argument correctly.

Same-sex marriage is not about EQUALITY. It is about the redefinition and destruction of marriage.

If redefined, polyamorists, Muslims, Mormons, and anyone lese with money will be able to redefine it as well.


7 posted on 03/14/2013 8:13:43 AM PDT by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

At this point I think all governments should just get out of the marriage business altogether. Stop issuing mariage licences and make everyone file taxes as a single. Then if their church, temple, coven, lesbian action league, gay men’s choir group or whatever wants to proclaim them married they can knock themselves out.


8 posted on 03/14/2013 8:15:02 AM PDT by Poison Pill (Take your silver lining and SHOVE IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
“I’m an old-fashioned traditionalist. I believe in the historic and religious definition of marriage,” he says. “That being said, I’m not for eliminating contracts between adults. I think there are ways to make the tax code more neutral, so it doesn’t mention marriage. Then we don’t have to redefine what marriage is; we just don’t have marriage in the tax code.”

Amen!!!

9 posted on 03/14/2013 8:19:08 AM PDT by ExCTCitizen (More Republicans stayed home then the margin of victory of O's Win...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
They want to force every institution, to consider gay marriages on par with heterosexual ones, and force religious institutions to give them equal weighting, and they will not stop until they get it.

That is CLEARLY true... Even in states where they have been granted EVERY other benefit with a Civil Union, they are not happy... What they want is, for their bizarre behavior to be consider "normal" and "equal"... They crave something that is not reality, and never will be.

10 posted on 03/14/2013 8:20:24 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
You're right and this is exactly why Rand Paul is also right.

The government, bolstered by voter results in several lefty states, have clearly demonstrated why the government needs to get out of the marriage business and be content with writing laws defining civil unions, domestic partnerships or whatever the hell else they wish to call it.

Leave marriage to the churches and synagogues alone to define.

If a worker demonstrates gross incompetence in a necessary skill-set and no inclination to improve but, indeed, a heightened stubbornness to cling to said incompetence, you assign them to a different line of work or get rid of them completely. So it should be with our government's involvement in marriage.

11 posted on 03/14/2013 8:21:25 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
RE :”Rand Paul: Let’s get marriage out of the tax code”

If DOMA is over-turned by the SCOTUS then it would make sense to do that, but otherwise it looks like another attempt to ‘end discrimination against gays’

12 posted on 03/14/2013 8:21:55 AM PDT by sickoflibs (O's sequester Apocalypse tour just proved why we need the 2nd amendment more than ever NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Treating Gay Marriage differently under the tax code is, legally, the SAFEST part of the conservative position. The goverment doesn’t have to treat everyone equally with taxes...

It’s all the other stuff, like benefits, that are the problem.. IMO

That said, I agree that, getting government OUT of the marriage business altogether is now the only way to save “Marriage” as God intended.


13 posted on 03/14/2013 8:23:17 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SomeCallMeTim
What they want is, for their bizarre behavior to be consider "normal" and "equal".

I would dare say, they won't even be happy with "equal". They don't want to merely be "tolerated", they want to be "celebrated."

14 posted on 03/14/2013 8:29:06 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

I agree with this for the most part. I also don’t think government should be able to marry people in offices. A marriage is done in a church, or some other kind of religious temple. It’s a ritual. If you’re an atheist, you can’t really be married, though you can sign onto a union of mutual financial interest and responsibility. A marriage is before divinity, a pact not only with a person, but with God.

This may be the best way to win the argument. Get government out of marriage, then homosexuals will have to join “homosexual churches” to get married, and as such progressive churches quickly lose membership and collapse, eventually, they just won’t be able to get “married”. They’ll be back in the deviant wilderness with the zoophiles and the polygamists.


15 posted on 03/14/2013 8:30:42 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

While Paul’s idea is interesting from a theoretical perspective, there is a perfectly rational reason that government has given a privileged position to marriage in the first place. Traditional families have been integral to the formation of society and human beings are social animals. In times of need, people have historically turned first to family. The raising of children, emotional and economic support and other social benefits derive from the traditional family. If we do away with this, the need will remain and people will demand that an ever larger government fill the role of economic, emotional and social support that is now provided by the family. I doubt this is Paul’s desired outcome.


16 posted on 03/14/2013 8:37:02 AM PDT by Lonely NY Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Same sex marriage will make our culture more dangerous.

Exactly! Another concern I have had since the beginning of the gay marriage argument has been gay foreignor rights to live in the US if they marry a gay American.

17 posted on 03/14/2013 8:37:52 AM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lonely NY Conservative

A problem is that with LBJ’s “Great Society” and welfare, which replaced a parent with a government paycheck, that ship sailed a long time ago.


18 posted on 03/14/2013 8:38:14 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; darrellmaurina
If we were starting a system from scratch, I suspect that would be an easier sell. But getting the federal government out of the marriage business, deferring to the states and allowing individuals to, as he says, enter into contracts with one another, can be the way out of the gay marriage thicket for the GOP, I would argue.

The Supreme Court, depending on its ruling in the same-sex marriage cases, may assist this process by striking down the Defense of Marriage Act, the biggest aggrandizement of federal power on marriage in my lifetime (maybe ever).

Conservatives understand that there is a realm of conduct left to churches, synagogues, families, localities and individuals. The essence of Burkean conservatism is a healthy regard for and respect for those realms and for the customs, habits and beliefs that flow from those free associations. Whatever the methodology, conservatives at the national level need to extract themselves from a losing battle that should not be within the purview of the federal government.

Kuyper "spheres of sovereignty" PING

19 posted on 03/14/2013 8:40:05 AM PDT by Alex Murphy ("If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all" - Isaiah 7:9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

They are a tiny per cent of the voting population. Why does anyone listen to them?


20 posted on 03/14/2013 8:41:19 AM PDT by jch10 (Hey GOP! Only Conservatives get my vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-178 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson