Gay Tax protest...

[southsider2k5]

Gay Tax Protest Snowballs

EDNEYVILLE, N.C., June 12, 2006 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Charles Merrill (72)

and his same-sex partner Kevin Boyle (52) have created huge momentum in their

civil disobedience initiative of not paying Federal Income Tax because they

cannot have the same tax benefits as other married couples. They have been

featured guests on radio, TV and in the print media, and it is angering

Republican lawmakers pandering to the religious right.

 

The momentum for the same-sex marriage tax protest started with an article on

Page Six in the New York Post and in an article on the Internet conservative

giant WorldNetDaily.com in February 2006. The articles were about Merrill and

his partner protesting an anti-gay marriage amendment sponsored by President

Bush. Merrill states, "As a result of nationwide publicity, we have had e-mails

from hundreds of gay men and women from all over the country wanting to join us

and asking how they could be a part of the gay tax protest." Boyle continued,

"We gays will gladly pay our taxes once the government stops discrimination

against us and passes laws that allows us to marry the person we love. We

deserve the same Federal and State benefits as other married citizens."

 

Discrimination in the tax code has also caught the attention of Howard Dean,

chairman of the National Democratic Party, and in a recent speech on June 3,

2006 to the gay political group National Stonewall Democrats' conference in

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, he stated, "It is wrong for our tax code to be

discriminatory. And it is wrong for any group of Americans to live in fear of

hate crimes. We (Democratic Party) believe that every taxpayer should have the

same government services and benefits as any other American." (Source:

http://www.365gay.com)

 

 

 

For more information regarding Gay Tax Protest, go to

http://www.gaytax.org.

 

Press Contact:

 

Charles Merrill

828-685-9673

[email protected]

http://www.gaytax.org

 

 

This release was issued through eReleases™. For more information, visit

http://www.ereleases.com.

[NorthSideSox72]

Again, if government (state AND federal) unwound itself from the business of marriage entirely, then none of this would be an issue. And there would be one less string of beuracracy to deal with. The gov't doesn't belong in the business of personal relationships.

[BHAMBARONS]

Again, if government (state AND federal) unwound itself from the business of marriage entirely, then none of this would be an issue. And there would be one less string of beuracracy to deal with. The gov't doesn't belong in the business of personal relationships.

 

 

That's correct the government has no business in telling who and who can not marry.

[mr_genius]

Again, if government (state AND federal) unwound itself from the business of marriage entirely, then none of this would be an issue. And there would be one less string of beuracracy to deal with. The gov't doesn't belong in the business of personal relationships.

 

definately

 

but not paying your taxes is a good way to end up in jail, they might want to take a different approach.

[FlaSoxxJim]

definately

 

but not paying your taxes is a good way to end up in jail, they might want to take a different approach.

One of my former high school theology teachers has refused to pay federal income tax for 20 years as a passivist protest. She's been arrasted arrested lots of times and has spent lots of time in jail for other acts of non-violent civil disobedience, but they've never thrown the book at her for willful nonpayment of taxes despite being quite familiar with her.

 

Then again, it's not like the government can squeeze blood fom a turnip. Lots of War Tax protesters deliberately earn less than taxable income, while others live communally or quasi-monastically and strive to be self sustaining through their own labor.

 

In her specific case, it doesn't hurt that she is the co-founder of Voices in the Wilderness and a three-time Nobel Peace Prize nominee. Every time she gets arrested it puts her in the spotlight and gives her an opportunity to be heard, including encouraging others to join her in War Tax resistence. The message is that tax resistance is the most direct way US citizens can avoid being complicit in the war.

 

I Kathy Kelly

[mr_genius]

The message is that tax resistance is the most direct way US citizens can avoid being complicit in the war.

 

 

i would probably get thrown in prison if i didn't pay my federal income tax, even though i would love to not pay it due to the fact i think the government wastes most of it.

Edited June 12, 2006 by mr_genius

[CanOfCorn]

i would probably get thrown in prison if i didn't pay my federal income tax, even though i would love to not pay it due to the fact i think the government wastes most of it.

 

 

Well that's a whole other can of worms, mr_genius.

 

Legislating marriage is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen. Hey Republicans, I thought you were supposed to leave that sort of thing to the states? Isn't that how it works?

[bmags]

sadly...this is my generations martin luther king...bahhhhhhhhhhhh

[FlaSoxxJim]

i would probably get thrown in prison if i didn't pay my federal income tax, even though i would love to not pay it due to the fact i think the government wastes most of it.

 

I'd get thrown in jail too, I'm sure. Somebody like Kathy that has spent years actively protesting US military spending, but who also walks it like she talks it by living below the poverty level and living in the community in Iraq (pre- and post-war) as a living example of Catholic charity, is probably less likely to end up in jail. For tax evasion, at any rate.

[CanOfCorn]

sadly...this is my generations martin luther king...bahhhhhhhhhhhh

 

 

I certainly hope you aren't talking about Kenan Thompson...

[FlaSoxxJim]

sadly...this is my generations martin luther king...bahhhhhhhhhhhh

 

More like Martin Luther Queen, I'd say. . .

 

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Well that's a whole other can of worms, mr_genius.

 

Legislating marriage is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen. Hey Republicans, I thought you were supposed to leave that sort of thing to the states? Isn't that how it works?

 

 

State after state is banning gay marriage. That doesn't sit very well with the left though so they whine about that as well.

[mr_genius]

Somebody like Kathy that has spent years actively protesting US military spending, but who also walks it like she talks it by living below the poverty level and living in the community in Iraq (pre- and post-war) as a living example of Catholic charity

 

very commendable

[bmags]

More like Martin Luther Queen, I'd say. . .

 

 

haha, well played, sir, well played!

[minors]

State after state is banning gay marriage. That doesn't sit very well with the left though so they whine about that as well.

 

 

Here in Tennessee it is on the ballot in November and it will easily pass maybe even getting 90% vote. I will be voting for it what this bill does is protect the state of Tennessee from having to reconize gay marraige from other states. Our governor in Phil Bresden (D) but has nicely taken a conversative stance supporting this measure which is making the left real pissed comparing him to George Wallace.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

For speed's sake, I'm just going to post my next to last column that ran in the Joliet Herald (after I had some furor in my student teaching with the whole Day of Silence thing and certain homophobes trying to shut it down etc.)

 

I heard something that made me laugh.

 

I was told that homosexuality was a choice. You mean people choose to be physically and emotionally abused, attacked, harassed, denied equal rights and condemned by close minded religious fundamentalists?

 

Let's face facts. Homosexuality is no more a choice than heterosexuality. This is not about special rights for some but merely equal rights for all.

 

Be scared no more, fundamentalists and reactionaries! Like it or not, marriage in the U.S. does not have to take place in a house of worship. Marriage can strictly be a civil institution in the eyes of the government without the injection of religious ideas. It has a multitude of civil and legal benefits afforded to those who enter. Homosexual couples should be guaranteed equal access to these civil benefits as members of the Constitutional republic.

 

Many anti-gay bigots deceptively use the term 'pro-family'. They proclaim that homosexuals cannot marry because their marriage will not produce children. Last time I checked, there is no mandate to have children in the vows of marriage. Countless thousands of couples who do not want or cannot have children are allowed to be married without this vile, despicable harassment from 'pro-family' advocates.

 

"Pro-family" discrimination can also be seen in adoption. Anti-gay advocates proclaim that gays cannot be parents and adopt because they will turn the children gay. If the parents' sexual orientation directly influences the child's, then straight parents must raise only raise straight children, right? Just ask Alan Keyes.

 

The religious overtones against homosexuality really raise my ire. One can thumb through the Bible to find passages to justify slavery and other terrible actions. The Bible also condemns eating pork -- yet Christian fundamentalists are not demanding a Constitutional amendment to enforce that Old Testament edict.

 

One cannot pick and choose which rules to follow merely to justify their biases. A religion based on compassion is cheapened and disrespected by such disgusting behavior.

 

If you don't like gay marriage, don't get one. Don't like consensual homosexual sex between adults? Then I'd suggest you don't engage in the activity. You can have your own perspective on homosexuals, but don't dare codify your biases into laws that infringe on the rights of other Americans.

 

To those who clamor for legislation and Constitutional amendments that will deny homosexuals equal rights, I simply ask that you remember one thing -- the members of our government placed their hands on the Bible to enforce the Constitution. They did not place their hands on the Constitution to enforce the Bible.

[BHAMBARONS]

Here in Tennessee it is on the ballot in November and it will easily pass maybe even getting 90% vote. I will be voting for it what this bill does is protect the state of Tennessee from having to reconize gay marraige from other states. Our governor in Phil Bresden (D) but has nicely taken a conversative stance supporting this measure which is making the left real pissed comparing him to George Wallace.

 

 

Not to be picky but there are many spelling error's I counted 4 in there plus I don't think you spelled your own Governor's name right. It is kind of hard to take your posts seriously when there is so many spelling and other error's in it.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Not to be picky but there are many spelling error's I counted 4 in there plus I don't think you spelled your own Governor's name right. It is kind of hard to take your posts seriously when there is so many spelling and other error's in it.

 

 

Its also kind of hard to take someone seriously when you choose to focus on spelling mistakes rather than the substance of his argument.

 

:rolly

[mr_genius]

Its also kind of hard to take someone seriously when you choose to focus on spelling mistakes rather than the substance of his argument.

 

:rolly

 

 

burn

[BHAMBARONS]

Its also kind of hard to take someone seriously when you choose to focus on spelling mistakes rather than the substance of his argument.

 

:rolly

 

 

I was just making a suggestion of using the spell check that's all. I have already posted my feelings on this issue earlier. While I don't support it, I also do not believe the government has the business of telling someone who they can and can not marry.

Edited June 13, 2006 by BHAMBARONS

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I was just making a suggestion of using the spell check that's all I already posted my feelings on this issue earlier. While I don't support it, I also do not believe the government has the business of telling someone who they can and can not marry.

 

 

Fair enough. I just wanted to say that pointing out ones spelling/grammar mistakes seems rather petty in this context.

[mr_genius]

I was just making a suggestion of using the spell check that's all I already posted my feelings on this issue earlier.

 

This is such a horrible display of sentence structure.

 

lol

 

i'm probably banned now

Edited June 13, 2006 by mr_genius

[BHAMBARONS]

Fair enough. I just wanted to say that pointing out ones spelling/grammar mistakes seems rather petty in this context.

 

 

Your right it is petty and I shouldn't have posted it.

Edited June 13, 2006 by BHAMBARONS

[mr_genius]

Your right it is petty I shouldn't have posted it.

 

na

 

"You're right, it is petty and I should not have posted it."

Edited June 13, 2006 by mr_genius

[CrimsonWeltall]

Don't try to interpret how he's saying things, Mr Genius. Maybe he didn't intend for there to be a pause after "You're right".

 

YOURERIGHTITISPETTY!