Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Machaon who wrote (405125)	5/11/2003 9:59:20 PM
From: Steve	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I see, so a drinking buddy suddenly becomes a taxable dependant? If you have several drinking buddies do they all become tax exemptions? Isn't that what you mean by same sex unions? How about your softball team, can you count your teammates as expenses too? You don't necessarily have to screw the catcher for him to be eligible. Have you approached the IRS with your interpretation of SAME SEX UNIONS? I'm sure they'll love you over there, no pun intended. Maybe you can pick up a few more exemptions there.

To: Machaon who wrote (405125)	5/11/2003 9:59:29 PM
From: jimcav	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

You knew ahead of time that Steve would be unable to grasp your position. It is obvious he is unaware that same sex unions would entitle many straight people to different tax advantages otherwise unavailable to them simply because they choose to remain unmarried to people of the other sex, while living a non-homosexual lifestyle. I currently have a 50 yr old employee who regularly has dated the opposite sex, noone confuses to be gay, and yet has lived for roughly 20 years with their best friend of the same sex. They purchased a house together, have joint bank accounts, and have each other listed as beneficiaries. Many, such as Steve, would of course jump to the conclusion they must be gay from reading this, regardless of whether or not they were. My point is, these 2 people should be entitled to any benefits available to people of opposite sex unions. The fact they've been in this situation for 20 years tells me it's more of a "union" than most hetero marriages these days...what's the length of time a hetero marriage lasts on average now?