Same Sex Marriage Impact Study

[Jayman01]

Here you go folks our tax dollars at work. As I said in a previous posting, the issue isn't about recognizing same sex marriages as a whole as it is about the loss of revenue to the government.

Read it and weep! You will need the Adobe Acrobat reader to read this though.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/55xx/doc5559/06-21-SameSexMarriage.pdf

I seems like government officials would need to be cuming to Broke Straight Boys studios to make up for lost revenues if we were given equal rights under law.

I wonder if this is the term to get our constitutional amendment or if we need to wait until the world populations is over crowded.

 

[tampa24]

I think we can all agree that one of the first flaws of the study is that they are basing their calculations on a marriage ready gay population of less than 1% of the total U.S. population. I think we could all agree that it would be a lot higher if and when it were to become legal. We could go on endlessly on our opinions of how much of the population is gay. Is it 10%, 15%, 8%, etc...

Obviously in this economic climate the federal government is worried about the possibility of adding any whole new group to entitlement programs. (Thanks Bush for watching the economy slide into the abyss.) They still don't know what the real impact would be though. They're just trying to make a somewhat educated guess at the financial implications. The report only clarifies what most of us already know. That being that we, as law-abiding taxpaying citizens, have less rights than the rest of the population.

 

[Jayman01]

I think we can all agree that one of the first flaws of the study is that they are basing their calculations on a marriage ready gay population of less than 1% of the total U.S. population. I think we could all agree that it would be a lot higher if and when it were to become legal. We could go on endlessly on our opinions of how much of the population is gay. Is it 10%, 15%, 8%, etc...

Obviously in this economic climate the federal government is worried about the possibility of adding any whole new group to entitlement programs. (Thanks Bush for watching the economy slide into the abyss.) They still don't know what the real impact would be though. They're just trying to make a somewhat educated guess at the financial implications. The report only clarifies what most of us already know. That being that we, as law-abiding taxpaying citizens, have less rights than the rest of the population.

Well, We certainly do have our work cut out for us, if we ever stand a chance at ammending the US Constitution.

 

[Jayman01]

I wonder how much any of this has to do with Straight people having Gay envy? LOL Just a thought...

 

[tucsonjayce]

It's all about the almighty dollar.....

Same sex marriage has always been framed to some extent in financial terms. But what of the revenue generated from all the "new" weddings? My partner and I had a church blessing in 1999. The cheapest thing was renting the church! The announcememnts, flowers, rehearsal dinner, DJ, food and beverages......etc etc etc came to almost $5000. Now what effect would all of us formalizing our relationships have?

It seems strange that concerns over revenue would trump basic civil rights, but that does seem the case.

DOMA is unconstitutional in that it denies full faith and credit, a constitutional provision that cannot be overridden by law. Not to mention the fact that the states are responsible for marriage and Uncle Sam doesn't have standing to regulate it.

Slowly but surely, we'll get there... there is just going to be a lot of money to be had for the lawyers.

Yours,

Jayce

 

[Jayman01]

Same sex marriage has always been framed to some extent in financial terms. But what of the revenue generated from all the "new" weddings? My partner and I had a church blessing in 1999. The cheapest thing was renting the church! The announcememnts, flowers, rehearsal dinner, DJ, food and beverages......etc etc etc came to almost $5000. Now what effect would all of us formalizing our relationships have?

It seems strange that concerns over revenue would trump basic civil rights, but that does seem the case.

DOMA is unconstitutional in that it denies full faith and credit, a constitutional provision that cannot be overridden by law. Not to mention the fact that the states are responsible for marriage and Uncle Sam doesn't have standing to regulate it.

Slowly but surely, we'll get there... there is just going to be a lot of money to be had for the lawyers.

Yours,

Jayce

Crazy, isn't it. I still find it hard to believe that we could bankrupt the economy any more than it already is to grant people simple God given rights. You know it is kind of funny; we are all surprised that the US balked at supporting anti gay laws on global level. Yet, we still don't have rights as citizens in the US ourselves.