How Dare You Prudes Deny My RIGHT to Have Sexual Relations With My Sister

You haven't done the math. I have. It won't affect you. You just hate queers and are trying to find some reasonable sounding argument aside from "I think they're icky, and I wish our society still repressed them so that they'd either act straight, or at least stay in the closet. And I'm scared I might be one myself, so I don't want to be around them in case I'm right."

 

bullspit you have..... economics 101 says you are wrong. You can not add highrisk groups to a system at a reduced risk price and expect things not to go up in price to accommodate or have services cut for the amount currently paid.

you have a bias in convincing me it won't affect me. but I'm just to take your word that "you did the math" bwahahahahahahahah, yeah.... ok.

Politics + math = POLITICS

 

Tell you what, you do the research. Find out what percentage of homosexual men currently do not have health insurance, and get back to me. Until you have a credible number on that, your argument is, as you say, bullspit.

 

Dude, if you want sex with your sister and she wants sex with you go for it. But your mom and dad may not like it.

 

lol...want me to verify YOUR claim, huh..... sure thing kiddo. bwahahaha

economics 101 was a course I took at college that refutes YOUR argument.

 

No, it's your claim. You have claimed that homosexual marriage will lead to increased health insurance costs, including yourself. I maintain that the rarity of homosexuals who do are not currently insured will make no difference. It's up to you to prove your point, if you can.

Hint: You can't.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics


that link proves it will cause an increase.


unless you can prove it doesn't with something other than "you did the math on it...."

 

It doesn't matter whether or not a person is currently insured when they get married. They will still get added to the spouse's program, even if only as a secondary policy. The policy will still have a increase in payouts, even if it is mostly just in paying things the primary policy doesn't cover.

Also, depending on costs and how the policies compare, many couples may choose to drop one of the policies and go for a cheaper, family plan. In these cases the insurer will see a reduction in premiums without any reduction in costs.

Both cases represent an increase in costs that will have to be passed to the policy holders.

 

Even if that's true (and I have my doubts, I was never on my wife's plan until it was my only option due to an employment change), tough (*)(*)(*)(*). Higher insurance prices is not an excuse to discriminate against an entire segment of the population.

 

I agree, but everyone needs to be prepared to see their premiums to increase or spousal benefits cut.

 

The more of your posts I read on this issue, the more clear it becomes how very emotionally invested you are in this. And how you don't really seem to care what the consequences of your stance are. You don't seem to care how other people are affected. You don't seem to care if other people get screwed over. And when these things are brought to your attention, all your response seems to be is, "tough (*)(*)(*)(*)." So then what is anyone's incentive to change their position to side with you? You're basically just saying, "(*)(*)(*)(*) you if you don't agree with me."

 

They are not. And that is where the core of my argument comes from. People opposed to SSM are NOT affected by it's becoming a reality. That cannot be debated.

 

Apparently it can. Homedude just pointed out something about a rise in insurance costs. And your response was....

Thus proving what I just said. That you don't really care if other people get screwed. You just want your way and you want it now. Consequences be damned.

 

I admit that health insurace costs could rise in theory, however it will be negligible, because how many homosexual marriages will there be? Just a little fraction of all marriages. And if it would be up to me, everyone should be insured, so it doesnt bother me. In addition to that, when homosexual family has kids and fullfils the role of family unit in society, I think they deserve the insurance just as much as heterosexual families do.

 

So all those that support gay marriage are gay?

-----------------------

Allowing gay marriage there can really be no objection to incest and polygamy, so the the question will be -

how long will it take some possessives to marry a few billion 3rd world people, get them into your country and put them on welfare?

 

As your other post about stats on single parent families, its not just those that suffer. Look at the stats of children with gay parents, they are all at a statistically disadvantage, tend to do more drugs, worse at school, depression and so on. These are all costs society will pay for one way or another.

Probably best to not worry about it all, its going to happen. Just make sure you keep your guns as society is going downhill in a huge hurry.

 

"How Dare You Prudes Deny My RIGHT to Have Sexual Relations With My Sister"
This is the OP. That is what I responded to. This dude wants sexaual relations with his sister.

But to answer your question, NO!!

 

heterosexuals can not marry their sisters, homosexuals want equal rights, not extra rights

 

hatecrime legislation begs to differ with that statement....


beat up a guy and call him a faggit - assault/battery
beat up his gay twin brother during the same fight and call him a faggit- assault/battery + hatecrime


why does the gay twin get extra protection that the straight twin does not? Because he sucks dick?

Sounds like EXTRA to me.

 

lol.... hypocritical gay supporters....

why can't a hetero marry his sister, but you support gays marrying.... entertain the following


1. 2 consenting adults
2. none of your business
3. procreation is not a requirement during marraige


which side am I arguing for? Gays or incest?


what about when a gay wants to marry his gay brother? Should they be allowed? That even takes out the procreation concern people have?



Why should a gay man be allowed to marry his brother when a straight man can't marry his sister?

 

Heterosexuals can not marry people of the same gender as themselves.

 

I should shut up about it and act as the rich and powerful do and have always done - denounce it in public, together with homosexuality, serious Christianity, decency, socialism and all the other wicked stuff, then use power and money to prevent anyone talking about what you get up to. Fundamentalism lives!

 

sure they can. And if gay marraige passes in my state, I'm going to marry my uninsured brother so I can add him to my insurance plan as a spouse.


he can't afford single coverage, but he could afford spouse coverage pricing. So since I'm an ECO 1101 flunk out, surely adding yet another person who should be paying full price at a reduced price rate will have ZERO affect on others

 

I think you missed the point I was making to FreshAir.

 

I may have.... I just like stirring it up some, by sarcastically pointing out hypocracies