Arizona Sheriff Paul Babeu threatened to deport his illegal Mexican ex-boyfriend
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 02:56:15 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Arizona Sheriff Paul Babeu threatened to deport his illegal Mexican ex-boyfriend
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Arizona Sheriff Paul Babeu threatened to deport his illegal Mexican ex-boyfriend  (Read 3358 times)
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 03, 2012, 09:36:20 AM »

I'm not sure which is more stupid:

You thinking Europe has no problem with illegal immigration.
You thinking everyone in the 3rd world wants to come to America.
You thinking fundamentalists who make Santorum look pro-gay will enter into same-sex marriages.
You thinking it's somehow easier to enter a platonic marriage with someone of the same-sex than the opposite.
You thinking Obama "agreeing" with you makes your oppinion more legit.
You thinking Sweden is extreamly hard to travel to.
You thinking there are no bisexuals.

^^^^^^^^^^
In addition to all these points, not having gay marriage increases the likelihood of strategic sham marriages. When gays feel they're never going to be able to get a "real" marriage, they're much more inclined to get a sham opposite-sex marriage to help a friend with immigration. I have personally seen this happen.
Logged
greenforest32
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,625


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 03, 2012, 10:22:12 AM »

Well there is some argument that two individuals who are married get some unfair benefits over single or unmarried couples such as having a lower tax rate when they file taxes as married-filing-jointly.

If the goal is to subsidize the children, then doesn't it make more sense to do it through more/higher tax credits/deductions that can be claimed for the children (whether married or not), not through having a lower tax rate that married couples without children can also claim?

Do agree that most of milhouse's points seem nonsensical.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.211 seconds with 12 queries.