Taxation is not theft.

A legal system can be faulty. (killing Jews was legal in the legal system of Nazi Germany) An action is being undertaken by government towards a person against his will, whether you'd call this purifying the race or taxation to justify it is irrelevent.

Irrelevant Conclusion

If somebody steals your car (which is only yours insofar as government recognizes your purchase), there will be action undertaken by the police section of the government in order to return your car against another person's (thief's) will. Compare that to Nazi laws too, maybe? By Godwin's law you've already lost.

The rich will always get richer, and the poor poorer.

Poor people also benefit from much of what the rich compose, and thus live more wealthy lives.

Fallacy Of False Cause

Not neccessarily.

Arguman's character limit for a premise is good for discourse

It is similar to how people speak in verbal conversation.

False Analogy

Speech differs from written argumentation.

Arguman's character limit for a premise is good for discourse

Then that person simply lacks the skill to speak in short and clear terms.

Appeal To Belief

Unless you substantiate your claim, the character limit may just be too small.

A universal basic income is the best way to eradicate economic inequality.

Class society is the root of economic inequality, and replacing capitalist productive relations with a socialist socioeconomic formation [1] is the most effective way to eradicate economic inequality.

Begging The Question

Since there are no fully communist countries in the world (even the USSR set communism as a *goal*, and declared to be living in socialism), such blanket statement is unsupported.

From an evolutionary standpoint, homosexuality is an unfavorable trait.

From a historical societal standpoint, it is also undesirable. Which begs the question: From what group standpoint is homosexuality desirable? I request a group standpoint because from individual standpoints, any number of arguments can be made regarding any topic.

Appeal To Belief

Without sources proving the undesirability from historical societal standpoint, the argument is baseless.

Both socialism and capitalism can function as economic systems when employed under adequate circumstances.

One writer does not define what socialism is. It is accepted by all economists that the above examples are socialism, and that almost all nations (including the US) are partly socialist.

Appeal To Authority

economists have no more authority on defining socialism than historians and philosophers.

Erotic fictional depictions (ex drawings, stories) of abusive sexual content (ex rape, incest, pedophilia) should be banned

The depictions will normalize the abusive behavior and increase its prevalence in the general population

Fallacy Of False Cause

By the same token, we should ban all violence in movies and literature.

Creationism is not compatible with current scientific theories and discoveries.

The existence of scientific law is itself evidence of creation. Laws of nature, matter, energy, fields are all evidence of creation for how else could these things have come to exist? Whatever brought these things into existence is what I term "creation".

Irrelevant Conclusion

The scientific "laws" are human approximations and generalizations of observations. They by themselves do not offer any support to the idea that they might be created.

Ethnic diversity reduces social solidarity and diminishes social capital

The lack of a common unified culture means people can only relate to people based on universal values. People often mistakenly project their cultural beliefs onto other people as universal values, taking them for granted. It leaves only our most basic instincts to relate to people with.

Irrelevant Conclusion

Ethnical diversity does not neccessarily mean lack of common unified culture.

The unemployed should be made to do community work to deserve their social benefits

Social benefits should be considered a right rather than something that needs justification of any kind.

Begging The Question

Doesn't explain why. The whole original premise is they shouldn't. You just say "no, they should".