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

Skip to comments.

A Clever Example of Tax Avoidance, but a Quandary for Leftists and Social Conservatives
Townhall.com ^ | July 1, 2013 | Daniel J. Mitchell

Posted on 07/01/2013 8:20:22 AM PDT by Kaslin

I generally believe that social conservatives and libertarians are natural allies. As I wrote last year, this is “because there is wide and deep agreement on the principle of individual responsibility. They may focus on different ill effects, but both camps understand that big government is a threat to a virtuous and productive citizenry.”

I even promoted a “Fusionist” principle based on a very good column by Tim Carney, and I suspect a large majority of libertarians and social conservatives would agree with the statement.

But that doesn’t mean social conservatives and libertarians are the same. There’s some fascinating research on the underlying differences between people of different ideologies, and I suspect the following story might be an example of where the two camps might diverge.

But notice I wrote “might” rather than “will.” I’ll be very curious to see how various readers react to this story about a gay couple that is taking an unusual step to minimize an unfair and punitive tax imposed by the government of Pennsylvania.

(Excerpt) Read more at finance.townhall.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: conservatives; economy; jobs; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

1 posted on 07/01/2013 8:20:22 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"I generally believe that social conservatives and libertarians are natural allies."

Please! Libertarians applauded the Windsor USSC decision. That is unforgivable by conservatives.

2 posted on 07/01/2013 8:23:32 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I generally believe that fiscal conservatives and libertarians are natural allies.

Social Conservatives and Libertarians have a whole host of differences. For instance, legalized drugs, legalized prostitution, and same sex marriage to name just a few.

3 posted on 07/01/2013 8:24:42 AM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“I generally believe that social conservatives and libertarians are natural allies.”

Nope.


4 posted on 07/01/2013 8:26:55 AM PDT by GenXteacher (You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The story is about two, gay Obama voters who don’t want to pay inheritance taxes. So one adopted the other. Typical liberals.


5 posted on 07/01/2013 8:46:48 AM PDT by aimhigh (Guns do not kill people. Abortion kills people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
For instance, legalized drugs, legalized prostitution, and same sex marriage to name just a few.

The War on Drugs has been the single most damaging policy (or set of policies) to the Bill of Rights that I can think of:
1st Amendment: there are negative impacts on the freedom to assemble, as well as practicing religion (Native American Peyote, for example).
2nd Amendment: the vast increase of felonies, intersecting with the GCA [IIRC, it might be NFA], creates thousands of people whose right to bear arms is infringed.
3rd Amendment: I don't know of any damage here, from the WOD.
4th Amendment: Stop and frisk, the exigent circumstances because they might flush a joint, and many, many, many more.
5th Amendment: the deprivation of property [and liberty] without due process is rampant to the point where it is SOP (and because it is SOP, they claim that it is due process).
6th Amendment: Just throwing in a bunch of drug-related charges can contaminate a jury.
7th Amendment: Because everything is criminalized the use of civil redress has gone way down.
8th Amendment: Excessive bail is the norm, as are excessive fines. It is easily arguable that it is cruel and unusual punishments to routinely rob men of a fourth of their lives and then tell them that they can live as 2nd-class citizens (rights kept from ex-felons, except by permission from the government).
9th Amendment: seriously undervalued — the control of inter- (and intra-) state commerce is not intended by the so-called commerce clause, indeed the word states appears in between foreign nations and Indian tribes. The importance of this is clear: if the federal government were to assert the level of regulatory control over a foreign nation as it does the states that would be an act of war. Moreover, enforcing such policies would be waging war, thus it is that the War on Drugs really is Treason. — How does this fit into the 9th? It fits because the ninth states that just because a right isn't listed doesn't mean it doesn't exist: therefore, there certainly can be a right to grow your own medicine (or food) and medicate yourself.
10th Amendment: See the 9th Amendment. The War on Drugs is the deprivation of the sovereignty of the States.

So that's 90% of the Bill of Rights that's directly damaged, in some way, by the War on Drugs. (Granted, the 7th Amendment is the shakiest, but even if we throw it out that's 80%.)

6 posted on 07/01/2013 8:47:32 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I generally believe that social conservatives and libertarians are natural allies.

No, Libertarians have no clue what their freedom is based on. Only a moral people can keep freedoms, just as our founders stated. They knew and warned us that once our faith was wiped out our freedoms would be lost.

Christians and Jews know where the wall of their freedoms stop while the rest find their freedoms allow them to prey on others which leads to freedoms being taken away for the safety of the people as a whole....

7 posted on 07/01/2013 8:49:03 AM PDT by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I told my father-in-law that if it passes in GA then we should divorce our wives and get a legal marriage to avoid all inheritance taxes.

He laughed, but then I saw him thinking about it. He still remembers the substantial hit when his father passed away.

The IRS has no idea what is about to hit them as accountants start getting creative. :)


8 posted on 07/01/2013 8:53:44 AM PDT by Noamie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I think the Libertarian position is: Why should government be endorsing any relationship between individuals (with tax incentives or capabilities)? Churches can endorse or preside over the relationships they choose to endorse, but the government should stay out of that.


9 posted on 07/01/2013 9:01:39 AM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

So are you a fiscal conservative or a Libertarian?


10 posted on 07/01/2013 9:17:34 AM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
So are you a fiscal conservative or a Libertarian?

Yes.

11 posted on 07/01/2013 9:18:54 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

ditto dat


12 posted on 07/01/2013 9:43:53 AM PDT by yadent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Good God, is this writer insane?

Libertarians are at brutal combat against traditional America, God, and social conservatism, it is what they are famous for and why they exist, to overcome social conservatives.

Here is the leftists agenda hidden behind the Libertarian Party curtain.

Libertarian Party Platform:

Throw open the borders completely; only a rare individual (terrorist, disease carrier etc.) can be kept from freedom of movement through “political boundaries”, eliminate the Border Patrol and INS.

Homosexuals; total freedom in the military, gay marriage, adoption, child custody and everything else.

Abortion; zero restrictions or impediments full 9 months.

Pornography; no restraint, no restrictions.

Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science and marketers can come up with, zero restrictions.

Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.

Military Strength; minimal capabilities.


13 posted on 07/01/2013 9:53:37 AM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
The story is about two, gay Obama voters who don’t want to pay inheritance taxes. So one adopted the other. Typical liberals.

Adoption has been an option for leaving one's estate to someone otherwise unrelated all along. That homos would use it does not come as a surprise. (They don't need an ersatz 'marriage' either.)

14 posted on 07/01/2013 9:54:18 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Unfortunately, we here a lot of this bilge here on FR.


15 posted on 07/01/2013 9:56:32 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
I generally believe that fiscal conservatives and libertarians are natural allies.

There is no such thing as a fiscal conservative that is socially liberal, as the destruction of families attendant to the latter inevitably induces major costs to government and raises a citizenry incapable of productive self-control. "Fiscal conservative" is an oxymoron.

16 posted on 07/01/2013 10:03:16 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

there are Libertarians with a big ‘L’ and small ‘l’ libertarians.

big ‘L’ Libertarians are the drug crazed, homo friendly, it’s a woman’s choice crowd

little ‘l’ libertarians are against those and push for small govt, personal responsibility, low taxes, and personal freedom.

you may think that’s what a republican is... but you’d be wrong. GWBush and MRubio are republicans that would not fit the libertarian mold and would be more in line with JFK then Ronald Reagan. of course, 0bama is more in line with Stalin or Mao then JFK... as today’s dems are far, far left of JFK (he would never be pro abortion and anti Christian)

Consevatives and libertarians align due to the expansion of govt and the conservative push against such a change. but at the end of the day, conservatives like to preserve the status quo... which keeps pushing left with every decade.

a libertarian’s desired position on the political balance beam would be rather fixed


17 posted on 07/01/2013 10:09:00 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

you’re talking about big ‘L’ Libertarians. please make the distinction
(see my #17)


18 posted on 07/01/2013 10:11:54 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sten
there are Libertarians with a big ‘L’ and small ‘l’ libertarians. big ‘L’ Libertarians are the drug crazed, homo friendly, it’s a woman’s choice crowd little ‘l’ libertarians are against those and push for small govt, personal responsibility, low taxes, and personal freedom.

They are exactly the same, there is no libertarian war against their own party positions, no disagreement on issues, libertarians are libertarians.

One thing they will do, is lie to fit what ever audience that they are speaking to.

19 posted on 07/01/2013 10:23:11 AM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

there is no libertarian party... but there is a Libertarian party that libertarians would not align with

;)

and please, republican positions keep sliding left. mine never have


20 posted on 07/01/2013 10:28:12 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If you are a congenial Hispanic woman golfer, you can also probably avoid a bunch of taxes via barter.

Check this story out.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3037193/posts


21 posted on 07/01/2013 10:33:08 AM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Actually that is just part of the story


22 posted on 07/01/2013 10:43:07 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Yes what?


23 posted on 07/01/2013 10:44:37 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sten

Libertarians are in agreement, the party positions represent libertarian thought and philosophy.

Libertarians will lie and deceive and tell an audience anything to conceal their real agenda.

There is no way to pretend that libertarians are social conservative, it is social conservatism that they hate and oppose, for one thing if they were actual full conservatives, then they would just be conservatives, economic and social.


24 posted on 07/01/2013 10:53:08 AM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Recently, a wealthy man in Palm Beach tried to adopt his girlfriend.

He was on trial for - and was eventually convicted of - DUI manslaughter.

I can’t remember his tax strategy, though.

Maybe he was still married?

Anyway, the judge said “no,” and that was the end of it.


25 posted on 07/01/2013 11:16:51 AM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
One thing they will do, is lie to fit what ever audience that they are speaking to.

So, you're saying that they're the same as RATs or Muslims?

26 posted on 07/01/2013 12:04:55 PM PDT by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed &water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

I think it is different, libertarian is a 50/50 thing, half of it is conservative, and half of it, (the most effective part) is radical leftism.

Libertarians will cling to the half that appeals to whichever audience they are trying to persuade, which generally is conservatives who they are trying to corrupt and move left into rionism, so they will talk taxes and how they agree with conservative economics.

Look at this article and how it subtly promotes gay marriage to a conservative audience, as though social conservatives have to weigh some tax issues versus legalizing gay marriage.


27 posted on 07/01/2013 12:18:01 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Libertarians can be in agreement about themselves, that has nothing to do with libertarians

it’s like saying that the GOP represents conservatives


28 posted on 07/01/2013 12:28:24 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sten

No it isn’t, the GOP is a vast political party representing about half of the voting population, libertarianism is a tiny little group of cultists and their own little party that helps put their agenda in political terms.

Since today’s topic is homosexuality, tell us where libertarianism is in opposition to this libertarian position.

1.3 Personal Relationships (libertarian)

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.


29 posted on 07/01/2013 12:57:25 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
libertarianism is a tiny little group of cultists

For such a tiny little group, they seem to cause you absolutely no end of anxiety.

30 posted on 07/01/2013 1:57:19 PM PDT by Notary Sojac (I call it messin' with the kid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

You mean being on a conservative political forum and discussing enemies of conservatism and promoters of abortion and the homosexual agenda and open borders, you might be at the wrong place if you think that is inappropriate here.


31 posted on 07/01/2013 2:00:38 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Not really a problem. This sort of thing has been going on for a very long time. It's been done by heterosexuals as well (or at least by people of different sexes).

Since it's been going on for a long time and it doesn't infringe on a religious institution, it's preferable to gay marriage. The younger guy adopting the older one, though -- that is strange.

32 posted on 07/01/2013 2:11:29 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

“social conservative” is a myth. There is only conservative.

attempting to balkanize into social fiscal governmental etc. is a rino power stunt.


33 posted on 07/01/2013 3:27:13 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

sounds like you just defined the republican plank on the issue.


34 posted on 07/01/2013 3:40:02 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: sten

Why couldn’t you bring yourself to answer the question?

Since today’s topic is homosexuality, tell us where libertarianism is in opposition to this libertarian position.

1.3 Personal Relationships (libertarian)

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.


35 posted on 07/01/2013 4:44:33 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Libertarians are at brutal combat against traditional America, God, and social conservatism, it is what they are famous for and why they exist, to overcome social conservatives.

Nonsense. Many libertarians are pro-life and pro-national defense, and don't believe everyone has an unalienable right to adopt children.

Don't conflate the Libertarian Party with libertarians in general. It's a convenient but wholly inaccurate smear.

And, yes, libertarians do oppose Constitution-destroying abominations such as the Tyrannical War on Drugs. I presume you favor alcohol prohibition as well, since it causes far more death, violence and misery than all illegal drugs combined...

Libertarians oppose arbitrary authoritarians of all flavors, whether left wing or right wing ones such as yourself.

Right-wing and left wing authoritarians simply differ on the type of nanny state which they think should be imposed on everybody else.

I reject both their Tyranny and yours...

36 posted on 07/01/2013 5:00:08 PM PDT by sargon (I don't like the sound of these here Boncentration Bamps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sargon

Don’t try that libertarian lie that “many” libertarians are pro-life, sure there are confused individuals supporting the radical leftism of the cult, but who recoil at full, unrestrained , unlimited abortion for the full 9 months, but they are not substantial in numbers.

There is no line separating the libertarians from their party.

Since today’s topic is homosexuality, tell us where libertarianism is in opposition to this libertarian position.

1.3 Personal Relationships (libertarian)

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.


37 posted on 07/01/2013 5:12:51 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Don't you try the lie that all libertarians somehow endorse the platform of the so-called Libertarian Party.

No doubt there are many libertarians who are not pro-life. But virtually every libertarian I know (and I know several) is pro-life. Being pro-life and, say, wanting to protect our borders or believing in strong national defense does not disqualify someone from being libertarian. It may not make the Libertarian Party happy, but most libertarians could care less about that...

38 posted on 07/01/2013 5:57:13 PM PDT by sargon (I don't like the sound of these here Boncentration Bamps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sargon

Libertarianism is libertarianism, the party is not some anti-libertarian organization mocking themselves, they are pure, libertarianism.

That is why you can’t answer post 37.


39 posted on 07/01/2013 6:01:48 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I understand as a republican youre desperately trying to find some solid ground, as your ‘leaders’ keep shifting positions to the left

the reason is , you’ve allowed yourself to be baited into an argument whose premise requires govt control over the fundamental construct...ie: interpersonal relationships

if you’re actually for smaller govt, then you would never entertain the concept that govt would rule one way or the other over the matter. as an American, you would be expected to respect others beliefs...whether or not they align with yours.

homo marriage is a step in the longer game of the destruction of the Church. I believe the govt has no say in either things... as did the founders.

you, on the other hand, seem to want a govt that dictates the personal behavior of every individual and organization. your confusion lies in this fact. you see... you’re not a believer in smaller govt... or a republican govt... you’re a fascist who believes in ultimate govt control

that’s just a fact


40 posted on 07/01/2013 8:46:33 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: sten
you’re a fascist who believes in ultimate govt control that’s just a fact

Another pro-gay marriage freeper who labels opposition to it as "facist", although the founders would have lynched you for your views, while I merely oppose you politically.

Well you don't understand that I am not a republican, and never have been, so you sure missed that.

The GOP has a long ways to go before it is as left as the libertarians though, since they are about as leftwing as it gets on social issues.

The founders, aside form complying with marriage law themselves for their own marriages, (Jefferson even dealt in marriage law as an attorney) also legislated on federal recognition of marriage when they passed the first widow pensions law in 1780 and enlarged in in 1794 and 1798, and 1802, so you just keep making things up.

41 posted on 07/01/2013 8:57:13 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

im confused... now you’re saying you’re not in favor of govt dictating interpersonal relationships?

and you’re not a republican or a libertarian... but you believe in govt control of personal relationships?

so... you’re a progressive democrat. got it


42 posted on 07/01/2013 9:29:54 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sten

You don’t seem to “got” anything, you just keep slip sliding around and throwing out all kinds of made up nonsense.

You refused to answer post 29, and you are none responsive to post 41.

Since today’s topic is homosexuality, tell us where libertarianism is in opposition to this libertarian position.

1.3 Personal Relationships (libertarian)

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.


43 posted on 07/01/2013 9:38:21 PM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

i have answered you, numerous times. you’re just a little too obsessed with other peoples sexuality to comprehend what you’re being told

ANYONE that believes in small govt CANNOT be in favor of the fedgov having ANY say in the personal relationships of its citizens.

personally, i’m appalled by homosexuality... but that doesn’t mean i want my government to get into the business of dictating my designs of interpersonal relationships onto other people.

you, on the other hand, seem to want a fedgov that has control over the personal lives of all Americans to the point of dictating who they are allowed to date. how you claim to be on the right side of the political spectrum is beyond me.

i’m pretty sure you’re a progressive democrat


44 posted on 07/02/2013 12:08:57 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: sten

So you support the creation of homosexual marriage and polygamy in America, homosexual marriage in the military and in spousal immigration and in adoption, in the name of libertarianism.

You support the libertarian agenda, which is what I was saying all along.


45 posted on 07/02/2013 12:34:56 AM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Noamie

It is too bad that it couldn’t have been some log cabin, conservative gay types that brought this to the Supreme Court. And press the issue not that “we want to be married, so we can avoid the inheritance tax”, but as a “it’s not fair that the married can avoid it, but the unmarried can’t. So strike down the entire Inheritance Tax theft”.

Seriously - what with the “equal protection” stuff, how come the unmarried don’t get the same deal as the married?


46 posted on 07/02/2013 12:44:57 AM PDT by 21twelve ("We've got the guns, and we got the numbers" adapted and revised from Jim M.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
...attempting to balkanize into social fiscal governmental etc. is a rino power stunt.

Absolutely correct. No one balkanizes conservatism unless they despise a portion of it - the "social" component.

47 posted on 07/02/2013 8:05:27 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I support no such thing enforced by the govt as that would expand govt control and power far beyond anything ever imagined by the founders

you, on the other hand, want intrusion in our daily lives by massive govt control.

you say you’re not a libertarian or a republican. conservatives aren’t in favor of massive govt either. neither are anarchists. there isn’t much left on the right side of the political spectrum... and since you’re about massive govt control, that leaves you on the left.

please, head back to DU


48 posted on 07/02/2013 10:40:00 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: sten

If I understand you correctly, you agree with this, which is the libertarian position.

“Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.”


49 posted on 07/02/2013 10:46:20 AM PDT by ansel12 (Sodom and Gomorrah, flush with libertarians and liberals, short on social conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I’m not in favor of homosexuality at all. but I’m also not in favor of massive big govt.

You seem to want the govt so big, it has control over your personal relationships

you’re either on the wrong site, a DU mole being outed, or are delusional about what a small govt means.


50 posted on 07/02/2013 11:07:09 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 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