patrick.net

chanakya4773 look at US tax code. Married people pay a lot more in taxes than single people do. Because US tax code assumes a wife makes 25% of husbands income, and increases taxes if she makes more.

Get over it already, you are not a victim. Taxes are not singling out single people, they are structured to take most they can from everyone who makes anything in order to fund government and everything around it.

robertoaribas says

I pay taxes to support schools, and I don't have and never will have kids... so screw you.

I also think that parents should pay much higher taxes just for this reason alone.

chanakya4773 says

What i mean is that statistically if you take thousand women and thousand men. The thousand women will on "average" be better teachers than the thousand men when it comes to teaching about the female body and experiences to a girl child. We can Safely conclude this based on the fact that women have an edge over men due to their experiences and this will show up when large numbers are involved.

...when we use large numbers (people) , this difference is guaranteed.

Well, then I am glad that we agree that amongst the population of 1000 that there are women who are better and more qualified to teach boys about their bodies than many of the men.

chanakya4773 says

Also its pretty ridiculous for many on this forum to suggest that the only recourse for a single man to give his inheritances ( including SS) without getting taxed to his sister is to marry her.

I agree that would be totally ridiculous. Who in this thread suggested that? I must have missed it. Please quote it.

Is it not also pretty ridiculous for someone to think that Social Security is an inheritance? I have heard lots of absurd misconceptions about SSI, but that is a new one.

leo707 says

Well, then I am glad that we agree that amongst the population of 1000 that there are women who are better and more qualified to teach boys about their bodies than many of the men.

Isn't that what gets all these female teachers in trouble?

chanakya4773 says

leo707 : this is for you..since you love studies.

Thank you, I do love studies, but I see here that you are using the term very loosely.

:(

chanakya4773 says

This study is as good as the study you posted on polygamy. Either we can discredit both or accept both.

Accepting one and discrediting another just for allowing rights for gays and excluding other unions is what is wrong.

I am not sure if you are trying to rack-up another logical fallacy to add to the list of fallacies you already committed in this thread; or perhaps your knowledge of scientific process is just so limited that you don't realize what you are saying.

In either case, you are mistaken. Not all studies are considered equal. The study you cite (or rather the article you cited that cites a study)--and probably did not actually bother to read--is as good as the studies cited by the Creation Museum.

If you had bothered to even read the article that cited the study you would know that this was not a "study" about gay marriage, and apparently close to zero of the subjects in the study were kids from stable same-sex married parents.

robertoaribas says

I pay taxes to support schools, and I don't have and never will have kids... so screw you.

Welcome to society, general welfare is in the constitution. My taxes pay for a lot of stuff you use too, yeah buddy!

And educated populace benefits everyone, not just the parents.

leo707 says

If you had bothered to even read the article that cited the study you would know that this was not a "study" about gay marriage, and apparently close to zero of the subjects in the study were kids from stable same-sex married parents.

The thing I noticed about Chan's linked article was, for the reason you've pointed out, it seemed to show the opposite of what he was trying to say. The heterosexual divorcees, who could get re-married, were less likely to require public assistance. That's the point I tried to make days ago, that a major government purpose of marriage is to keep people off public assistance. That is particularly true for single parents, especially unwed or divorced mothers: when moms are allowed to get married or re-married, they are less likely to go on welfare or Medicaid, and the children have more security. Denying lesbian couples the equal protection of the marriage laws imposes a measurable cost on them and their children in the short run, and a measurable cost on the public in the long run, with no benefit to anyone.

marriage is slavery and should be abolished.