Quote# 90251

If the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause applies to an individual's 'right' to marry irregardless of sex, then the IRS tax code should apply to the individual's tax rate irregardless of income.

Also, the Lilly Ledbetter act and the Civil Rights Act are also unconstitutional.

HapaxLegamenon, Free Republic 55 Comments [10/22/2012 3:49:39 AM]
Fundie Index: 49

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 3 | bottom


Go choke on your hood, you fucking cross-burner.

10/22/2012 11:30:43 AM


Why do so many conservatives have trouble with the English language? Seriously, even if you wold make a good point (which won't happen ever) nobody will take you seriously.

10/22/2012 11:34:36 AM


Yeah, cause it's constitutional to torment and isolate individuals. Oh wait.

10/22/2012 11:39:04 AM


Equal protection 1: I have the right to marry a man (or had before I married my husband, as polygamy is not legal), but my husband never had the right to marry a man.
Equal protection 2: I pay a certain percentage of my salary in taxes. My husband, who earns a bit more than me pays the same percentage of his salary in taxes.

"Irregardless"? Are you sure that English is your first language?

HOW are they unconstitutional? If women get paid less for similar jobs, that's discrimination, which is illegal in most democracies. If someone beats me up every Saturday, it's not just the first beating that counts; each and every beating is a new crime.

10/22/2012 11:47:55 AM


@Pilotess: The irony of this never ceases to amuse me. The people who complain about immigrants not having good knowledge of English always seem to have a less than stellar grasp of the language themselves. (I've also noticed that people who have actually studied a foreign language tend to be a lot more forgiving of immigrants with poor English skills, but I digress.)

10/22/2012 12:23:37 PM

Old Viking

Marriage is a right, paying taxes is a duty. In what way are they comparable?

10/22/2012 1:25:00 PM


At least he didn't say, "anywho."

That's the only nice thing I could think of to say about that pile of shit.

10/22/2012 1:36:46 PM


the IRS tax code should apply to the individual's tax rate irregardless of income.

Yes, millionaires should start paying their share.


What a relief, thank God there's only one of you.

10/22/2012 1:37:33 PM


"Also, the Lilly Ledbetter act and the Civil Rights Act are also unconstitutional."

Do you mean that same constitution that is supposed to be of the people?

10/22/2012 1:37:58 PM


I stopped reading after "irregardless."

10/22/2012 2:46:51 PM


The U.S. Supreme Court upheld progressive income taxes as constitutional in 1916.

And, yes, the 14th Amendment DID exist at the time.

10/22/2012 3:34:44 PM


"Hapax Legamenon" is a unique, one of a kind word in a body of literature. This mother fucker is not unique at all but rather commonplace. Kind of like pond scum. He may eat my shit then find the biggest fire to die in.

10/22/2012 3:56:15 PM


That just doesn't follow at all.

10/22/2012 5:51:20 PM

Raised by Horses

@Rabbit of Caerbannog, WWBFD, Meowcifer

Beat me to it.

Also, technically, "irregardless" is a word, i.e. it has been absorbed into dictionaries, but even then, they usually tell writers not to use it. When a dictionary tells you not to use a word, you should probably take its advice.

10/22/2012 6:13:18 PM

Ahh, but, to use your arguments against you:

You don't have to make that much money. You could donate any excess over the desired tax bracket to charity. It's your choice to make too much money.

10/22/2012 6:56:53 PM

Mike Litoris

Not much of a Constitutional scholar, I see.

10/22/2012 9:24:57 PM

And you think discrimination based on race or gender is constitutional?

If it actually is, which it isn't, then I have a shocker for you.It's time to throw the constitution out.

10/23/2012 1:10:13 AM


I'm betting you do lots of things that aren't in the Constitution on a daily basis.

You do realize that a flat rate tax would screw you...don't you?

10/23/2012 10:20:57 AM


"Irregardless is not a word, retard. As to your other comments, they fail hard too.

10/23/2012 5:14:11 PM

Three things: One, using the non-word irregardless makes you a douche. Two: Though I'm certain you intended the tax rate to be an attack on the poor the US treasury would find itself in a position where it could lower everybody's taxes if the top 3% went and actually paid the same portion of their income as everybody else instead of their generous caps and breaks and still come out on top. And 3: Not respecting civil rights makes you a fuckwit.

On a side note, the American tax collection system is extremely stupid, it's almost like it's specifically designed for people to cheat it.

10/23/2012 9:21:39 PM


It's regardless, you irritating ir-retahd

10/24/2012 1:28:28 PM

Stop! Non-Sequitur time!

10/25/2012 10:06:53 AM


Error! Error! Statement does not compute!

10/25/2012 2:18:06 PM

Where in the Constitution does the federal government get the authority to regulate how much a woman is paid or who a business owner has to do business with on his own property? The Ledbetter and Civil "Rights" Acts are unconstitutional.

10/27/2012 7:50:30 PM

Forty years too late, to my taste

10/28/2012 10:50:23 AM

1 2 3 | top: comments page