They’ve tried saying homosexuality will be taught in schools……….
They’ve tried saying homosexuality is contagious……
now they’re saying; gay marriage HURTS THE ECONOMY.
Which is quite laughable…………considering…
The issue you bring up is a novel one However it does add to the armamentarium of arguments in favour of gay marriage,
The argument that because Mass was able to attract young, educated gay couples helped the State’s economy.aappears to be valid It is well know that gay persons on average, have higher IQ and a higher level of education
In addition it would enhance the tourist industry and would allow the expansion and development of businesses catering to gay people or both straight and gay and thereby enhance the economy. At present many businesses because of fear or prejchoicedo not make ooutreachto the gay community> lastly since gays on average earn a higher income they would be paying more in taxes,which would assist to dealing with the sagging economy.
Lastly studies show that straight married people are less isolated and display less social ,and psychological pathology than those who are single, If the same result applies to married gay persons, then there would be less of a strain on the mental health and possibly the crimin justice systems
Hope this helps
It has taken thousands of years for family law to evolve. I think it is inevitable that some sort of contractual marriage agreement that accommodates gay couples is created, but I will be amazed if we have gay marriage in every state, for immigration and insurance reasons, within the next 50 years.
It should be called something like (as in UK) civil partnership, not marriage, please!
One problem is that the idea of being “gay” in this context is a bit dubious
In Britain, there were two sisters who had lived together for many years and wanted to avail themselves of the civil partnership option. However, they were told they could not do so as they did not constitute a gay couple.
I think this was unfair, as there are some married couples who have had no sex with each other from the outset.
Gay is basically in the eye of the beholder
I agree that a lot of that is bunk but I am still against gay marriage because I believe it to be morally wrong. The whole reason they want marriage is to gain acceptance not tolerance like they claim. I tolerate a child screaming on a plane but I don’t have to like it. They can corn hole each other till their bung holes whistle Dixie but don’t try to force me to say this is an acceptable thing that they do and by forcing the marriage issue you are forcing me to accept it at least on a legal level and even that is too much.
guess I don’t understand your question. I thought the law already went into effect. so what’s the problem now?
Don’t worry, Lois. Gay marriage will eventually be legal in this country. I am very much pro marriage, period. It’s the divorce rate that we should be more concerned with.
Homosexuality: Happening unnaturally, naturally since the dawn of man.
Obama is against gay marriage you know, guess you’re right then he does have no credibility.
Oh there’s no use arguing any rationale with the bible-humpers, what is written in the holy book must be! Don’t you just wanna hit em?
Edit: Lib Nemisis.. says who?? And don’t tell me the bible because first off, society has evolved past most of what the bible says so why the bible-humpers can’t evolve past this is beyond me. SECONDLY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY… NOT EVERYONE WHO GETS MARRIED IS A F*CKING CHRISTIAN, so why must we ONLY follow THEIR rules?
Yea they usually do. Why conservatives think it is any of their business who anyone marries is beyond me.