May 3, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, Procus said: Best not to comment on things you don't know about. Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return. The tax rates for married filing separate are higher than for those filing single. This is basic knowledge. This is also why with regard to taxes, the term "marriage penalty" is often used. Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade Oh gee, I don't know, maybe because you literally brought it up by referring to same sex marriage you brain damaged moron.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, Procus said: She could "argue" whatever she wanted - but without the rest of the court joining in - it was just argument and nothing else. Certainly no legal weight at all. Her legal theory was developed before she was on the court and provided testimony about in confirmation hearing. The legal theory better than privacy, that she hoped the decision would be based on is Equal Rights based on Sex. See the text above.
May 3, 20223 yr 6 hours ago, Procus said: Legally, Roe v Wade always stood on poor footing. There is no right to privacy conferred on a woman which gives her the right to an abortion. This is a state - not a federal - issue. Same with the right to gay marriage. Perfect example of the Supreme Court legislating matters that lies within the purview of the states. Reminder for the "lawyer" suffering from dementia
May 3, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, Procus said: Best not to comment on things you don't know about. Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return. The tax rates for married filing separate are higher than for those filing single. This is basic knowledge. This is also why with regard to taxes, the term "marriage penalty" is often used. Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade It's a troll. It has got to be.
May 3, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, Procus said: That's a bad example. The marriage tax is a penalty for being married - not a benefit. 3 minutes ago, Procus said: Best not to comment on things you don't know about. Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return. The tax rates for married filing separate are higher than for those filing single. This is basic knowledge. This is also why with regard to taxes, the term "marriage penalty" is often used. Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade Brings up marriage penalty, then wonders why people are discussing marriage penalty...
May 3, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, Paul852 said: It's a troll. It has got to be. Yeah. That's my conclusion at this point.
May 3, 20223 yr 13 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Reminder for the "lawyer" suffering from dementia What's your excuse for yourself?
May 3, 20223 yr 18 minutes ago, Procus said: Best not to comment on things you don't know about. Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return. The tax rates for married filing separate are higher than for those filing single. This is basic knowledge. This is also why with regard to taxes, the term "marriage penalty" is often used. Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade you brought it up.
May 3, 20223 yr 13 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: Her legal theory was developed before she was on the court and provided testimony about in confirmation hearing. The legal theory better than privacy, that she hoped the decision would be based on is Equal Rights based on Sex. See the text above. Whether or not the end result of Roe was good result is an entirely different discussion than whether or not the opinion is well reasoned from a legal standpoint.
May 3, 20223 yr 14 minutes ago, vikas83 said: Brings up marriage penalty, then wonders why people are discussing marriage penalty... beat me to it.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, Alpha_TATEr said: you brought it up. In the context of the Supreme Court legislating instead of deciding - not in the context of whether or not Roe was well reasoned
May 3, 20223 yr 47 minutes ago, vikas83 said: Just putting this here so people stop inventing my position in order to argue against views I don't espouse. Post as it as much as you want, I'm not going to read it, baby killer.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, paco said: Post as it as much as you want, I'm not going to read it, baby killer. You want to Drexel, dude. I know you can't read and comprehend anything not in visual basic.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, Procus said: Whether or not the end result of Roe was good result is an entirely different discussion than whether or not the opinion is well reasoned from a legal standpoint. Correct. I believe RBG was saying that had the legal reasoning been different, based on the Constitution, it would not have sparked the same outrage. At the time in the 1970's a majority of both Republicans and Dems believed it abortion was the decision of the women and her doctor. Once, the decision was written on privacy and talking about Viability and the Trimesters it became a powder keg. Anyway, I believe she was correct and her legal argument is a sound one.
May 3, 20223 yr 50 minutes ago, Kz! said: Never forget what the left wants. Just look at jsdarkstar. This is what they want. This is why it's so important for states to have rights on this issue. It's incredible that it's her bill and she's doing everything she can to not answer a direct question. If I put together a presentation and didn't have an answer and pulled that s***, I'd be throw out on the streets.
May 3, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, Procus said: In the context of the Supreme Court legislating instead of deciding - not in the context of whether or not Roe was well reasoned
May 3, 20223 yr 24 minutes ago, Procus said: Best not to comment on things you don't know about. Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return. The tax rates for married filing separate are higher than for those filing single. This is basic knowledge. This is also why with regard to taxes, the term "marriage penalty" is often used. Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade "Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return." Once again, as I said, you aren't REQUIRED to file a joint return. For being a lawyer you sure have trouble reading........I shouldn't have said that "marriage penalty" isn't a real thing. It is for SOME, but for the majority of people you get a tax break from being married. "Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade" ffs.......................YOU brought up gay marriage. you said "Same with the right to gay marriage". I then responded to your incorrect point explaining how banning gay marriage denies people equal protection under the law.
May 3, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, vikas83 said: You want to Drexel, dude. I know you can't read and comprehend anything not in visual basic. If you ignore the autocorrect, this is the most accurate thing ever posted here, you pile of 1's and 0's
May 3, 20223 yr 7 hours ago, ToastJenkins said: They have a coherent message: welfare state Not really. But at least you got their pronoun right.
May 3, 20223 yr 25 minutes ago, TEW said: So, again, it’s not a right. It’s a condition of service. Which again, because of EMTALA, is semantics. If you are having an emergency medical situation, you can go into just about any hospital in the country, and by law they have to stabilize you regardless of your ability to pay, your citizenship or immigration status, etc... For all intents and purposes, people in this country have a right to be stabilized in an emergency medical situation.
May 3, 20223 yr 5 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: "Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return." Once again, as I said, you aren't REQUIRED to file a joint return. For being a lawyer you sure have trouble reading........I shouldn't have said that "marriage penalty" isn't a real thing. It is for SOME, but for the majority of people you get a tax break from being married. "Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade" ffs.......................YOU brought up gay marriage. you said "Same with the right to gay marriage". I then responded to your incorrect point explaining how banning gay marriage denies people equal protection under the law. Okay, let's try and do this in a way where a simple minded person like you can understand. If you're married and have the threshold income requirement - no you don't have to file jointly. If you don't file a joint return, what kind of return do you have to file? Would this kind of filer have higher or lower tax rates than that of a single person filing a return? See if you can answer these simple questions. You can do it - even YOU can do it!
May 3, 20223 yr somebody earlier, not sure who it was, asked, what does all of this have to do with roe vs wade ?
May 3, 20223 yr 41 minutes ago, Procus said: Best not to comment on things you don't know about. Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return. The tax rates for married filing separate are higher than for those filing single. This is basic knowledge. This is also why with regard to taxes, the term "marriage penalty" is often used. Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade uh, I'm pretty sure that is false. married filing separate means each is treated the same as a single person. only one parent can claim children as dependents however. and I think one parent may still be able to claim head of household. but I'm not an expert here. and clearly neither are you.
May 3, 20223 yr It would be a real pisser if that draft which was leaked had no bearing on the final opinion which turned out to be something completely different.
May 3, 20223 yr 17 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: "Any person who is civilly married in the U.S. (assuming minimum income threshold requirements are met) is either required to file a joint return or married filing separate return." Once again, as I said, you aren't REQUIRED to file a joint return. For being a lawyer you sure have trouble reading........I shouldn't have said that "marriage penalty" isn't a real thing. It is for SOME, but for the majority of people you get a tax break from being married. "Again, not sure how any of this relates to Roe v Wade" ffs.......................YOU brought up gay marriage. you said "Same with the right to gay marriage". I then responded to your incorrect point explaining how banning gay marriage denies people equal protection under the law. "if the marriage penalty isn't a real thing how come I can find web pages in google with it huh!?!??!?!?!"
Create an account or sign in to comment