California same-sex couples get tax break

PlanetOut ^ | July 10, 2003 | Randol White

[nwrep]

PING

[Support Free Republic]

How we have, and can, change the world

History of Free Republic

Click The Logo To Donate

[ItsOurTimeNow]

Good Lord, where's the *BARF ALERT* for those pictures?

Have you no decency!? lol

[xzins]

Why shouldn't singles/unmarried/unpartnered get the same tax break?

[nwrep]

Why shouldn't singles/unmarried/unpartnered get the same tax break?

Because we are bigoted, hateful, and conservative. This is about reparations for the gays, don't you see?

[xzins]

I agree with you.

I'm just wondering at the logic behind why they were giving a tax break to marrieds that they weren't giving to singles? Do you have any idea what it might be?

[Mo1]

They're the same sex?
Is that Pat?

[Paul Atreides]

How about a new show for Spike TV: STRAIGHT LIKES FOR THE UGLY DYKES

[RightOnline]

Hint: they aren't 'married'. I don't care what anyone says. They're co-habitating homosexuals. I don't like their lifestyle. I don't approve of it. My religion speaks strongly against it. Most peoples' religions speak strongly against it. We don't want to subsidize them.

Get it, California? Plain enough for you?

Damned if I'll ever, ever live in that State again.

[Paul Atreides]

I think the one on the right is Ozzie Osbourne's son.

[EGPWS]

Why shouldn't singles/unmarried/unpartnered get the same tax break?

For the usual reason I suppose. The Guberment wants to dictate a lifestyle that is conducive to a healthy society. Apparently in California lawmakers don't feel being single does that. Go figure!

[Cicero]

Presumably they will get the tax benefits of married couples but will not have to suffer any of the well-known marriage penalties, such as having to file joint returns.

Bush has spoken about doing away with the marriage penalties, but that won't reall happen for practical purposes as long as he leaves the Alternative Minimum Tax in place.

[xzins]

The military grants larger houses to married couples with children than it does to married couples without children. They limit singles to barracks or to smaller housing allowances.

They say that it supports families and children.

Singles say it isn't fair. Who is right? One doesn't do any more work than the other does?

[CGTRWK]

Creating special reduced tax status for perverts, while the state is looking at a 30 some billion dollar deficit and raising taxes on everything else in sight. Way to go California.

[ErnBatavia]

Kid gets around, doesn't "she"?

[EGPWS]

The military grants larger houses to married couples with children than it does to married couples without children. They limit singles to barracks or to smaller housing allowances.

One should be careful as to what one wishes for. Look at the bright side, I live in a large split level on a large lot. I'm single and beleive me there are plenty of times I wish I had a smaller place suited for one person! It can be a LOT of work for 1 person! :0 The military however can do what they want. It is a contractual agreement between the enlistee and the military. When it comes to Civil Government one can toss contracts out the window and in most, if not all, cases the decisions are based on political power and votes not what is best for society.

[TheAngryClam]

Why is not forcing them to pay taxes a subsidy?

Anything that reduces the taxes paid to government is a good thing.

[TheAngryClam]

So I take it you agree with the Democrats that the way to solve our budget crisis out here is to raise taxes?

[navyblue]

Does this mean that I can now get the same benefits with my live-in girlfriend even though we are not married?

Now why do I thing I will never get away with that?