Skip to comments.Rand Paul: Letís get marriage out of the tax code
Posted on 03/14/2013 7:41:29 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Replies 8 and 9.
You both make good arguments. Get the government out of marriage.
The queers won’t like it because it takes away one of their most powerful pulpits, but I don’t care. The government is spending way too much time and our tax dollars on something that fundamentally is none of their business.
Tired but true: you can’t legislate morality.
Yes... that's a BIG reason as well. All part of the same.
- We used to marry women from other countries without interference.
- We used to have only assets people had as money to be shared with a spouse.
- We used to hold the parents on a birth record as the legal guardians (and sole providers—NOT government) until some legal situation changed that (such as death of parents).
Your points do not prove why it's wrong for government to get out of marriage. Your arguments prove why government should get out of even more pervasive matters.
It’s too late to privatize marriage. The state has utterly taken it over, and the results are much the same as with everything else the state takes over. Rand Paul is naive to think that his proposal will in any way protect traditional marriage. It might take away one small, technical argument the gay marriage proponents use, but it won’t even slow them down.
I cringe at weddings when the priest/minister says “by the power vested in me by the state of _______”. We’ve been sitting there in a church, hearing about God’s idea of marriage for an hour or so, and suddenly, the state shows up out of nowhere. Who invited them? Oh well, it’s too late to kick them out. They crashed the wedding.
Rand is a rational man who doesn’t get how fanatics think. The gay activists are fanatics. They are on a vendetta against society, the church and God. They do not even know what they want or else they would not go to bath houses and do the things they do which are dangerous to their own lives. When people’s obsessions supersede their survival instinct, they should definately not be leading the parade of social change. Many homosexual activists are very bright and glib, they are very good at rationalizing their insanity and that is very dangerous not just for them but for society as a whole.
When they invade churches during religious services they are declaring war on the churches. These are not nice people and they do not want to go half way. They want it all. They are mad, sick people who want to control society. The more power they get by weak people giving in to them the worst they get. They are very much like spoiled children who become more irrational the more their parents give in to them.
In short: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
No we do not and the government should not be allowed to do so either...it is not their business, period.
Well I wouldn't phrase it quite like that. People will get confused.
But yes the federal government should not be involved with marriage. They should not have any powers as not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
"Powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States or the people".
Libertarians use economic policy to divide themselves from fellow Liberals, but when they destroy civilized society with homosexual marriage, legalized drugs, euthanasia, etc - you can believe they will be demanding cash and programs from the government (which, after the collapse will be a communist dictatorship).
Just wait 'til the bi-sexuals each want to marry a man and a woman.
Marriage is included in the tax code because it is beneficial to the country. GAMILY is the core of any great nation. Destroy it, and you destroy the country....which is why liberals are hell bent on perverting it, encouraging sexual temptation in marriage and destroying our children’s chances of having successful marriages by sexualizing them so young. I wish that before republicans jump on a liberal bandwagon and attempt to throw stuff out, that they would consider why it was established that way to begin with.
I think it is very hard to pick a pol to support unless you view like an ala carte menu. With Rand, it may be that he has a few ideas I support, but he may well come out with a bunch of ideas I cannot abide. For me, I then have to determine if the pol supports some issue that will I WILL not, CANNOT abide.
Right now, I am not convinced I would support Rand for any higher office. Luckily, there is lots of time before I need to throw my support to any ONE pol.
The government won’t get out of the marriage business because then it couldn’t stick it to middle income Social Security recipients. Back in 1983, the Republicans (Reagan Admin) and Democrats agreed to tax Social Security income for the first time. A complex calculation was created to see who would have to pay tax on their SS and it included a $25,000 deduction for a single person, and $32,000 for married people. This figure has never been adjusted for inflation after 30 years.
If adjusted the figures would be around $58,000 and $74,000. I know retirees with modest income above their SS who don’t feel they can afford to get married because of that $32,000 limit. Thus they stay single so they can each deduct $25,000. Of course if there was an inflation fix, then a lot of them could afford to get married, instead of living in tax code promoted “sin.”
In a number of states there are humanist celebrants licensed to perform marriages, birth ceremonies, etc. of a non religious nature for humanists, atheists, freethinkers, agnostics, etc.
That second sentence may be true under some strained and highly unusual definition of "public" - but that definition clearly has no legitimate bearing on privacy rights.
because they tend to go into the entertainment industry
Don’t forget that the leftist animals believe that all humans are PROPERTY OF THE STATE.
They believe that you aren’t married until it goes into a government file and any children added to the file are cattle.
Give them 20-50 more years and government will have the RIGHT to KILL anyone who violates the paper contract and kill any child caught being raised by a non-authorized guardian.
It’s going to happen because the enemy knows that many are soft and helpless.
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.