Marriage Equality Legalization Would Add To Illinois' Economy

Mar 6, 2013 Full story: lezgetreal.com 290
The legalization of same-sex marriage would add millions to the Illinois economy as at least half of the state's LGBT population would marry. Full Story
First Prev
of 15
Next Last

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1 Mar 6, 2013
Oh just pass the damn bill already!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#2 Mar 7, 2013
ROFL!!!

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#3 Mar 7, 2013
"WOULD" add to the economy?? D'ya think???

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#4 Mar 7, 2013
This bill is on the calendar for 2nd reading, but no word when it will actually get to a vote. Maybe next week? Or next month?

I hate waiting for legislators to do their job.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#5 Mar 7, 2013
However, if gay marriage were legal throughout the US, the economic impact would be a bit short-lived. After all, lots of folks who couldn't marry before would do so all at once, then the rate would return to the normal rate of heterosexual marriage plus presumably an additional 4-10%. Still, the additional percentage would help some wedding planner, banquet halls, florist and bakeries. These people are probably impacted by many other social changes as well. I would give a good guess the florists in Illinois have benefitted to a great degree from the major increase in the Hispanic population. Ever go to a Mexican funeral? It is like a corpse in a garden.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#6 Mar 7, 2013
BIG news from Justice Kennedy while in Sacramento yesterday.

Read his remarks about 9 unelected justices deciding politically charged issues like gay marriage, healthcare, immigration.

Is this a clue how he's going to rule?

Could DOMA & Prop 8 both be upheld in favor of letting Congress & the states working it out through the democratic process?

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#7 Mar 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
BIG news from Justice Kennedy while in Sacramento yesterday.
Read his remarks about 9 unelected justices deciding politically charged issues like gay marriage, healthcare, immigration.
Is this a clue how he's going to rule?
Could DOMA & Prop 8 both be upheld in favor of letting Congress & the states working it out through the democratic process?
Anything's possible, of course, but wouldn't that pretty much be him declaring that we don't need a judicial system at all?? If he's saying the courts should defer to public opinion and Congress, why do we need that branch of government? Just let 'em pass any law "the people" want, without regard to constitutionality, and let them all stand until "the people" change it. Why have a constitution at all if that's what he's thinking?

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#8 Mar 7, 2013
This is the only text I can find online that references what I think you're referring to (and it's posted on hundreds of copycat news sites):
SACRAMENTO, CALIF. Justice Anthony Kennedy says he is concerned that the U.S. Supreme Court is increasingly the venue for deciding politically charged issues such as gay marriage, health care and immigration.

The 76-year-old associate justice said Wednesday that major policies in a democracy should not depend "on what nine unelected people from a narrow legal background have to say."

Rather, he said, it is important for political leaders to show the world that democracy works through compromise.

Kennedy, a former Sacramento law professor, was in California's state capital to attend the dedication of a federal courthouse library bearing his name. He often has been the swing vote on the high court's split decisions.
If this is what you're referring to, I interpret it much differently than it sounds like you have. I think he's indicating some level of frustration that they HAVE to continually decide these issues because politicians are not doing their jobs.

I would agree with him on that.

But then, under our system, NO case regarding the constitutionality of a law would ever be reviewed by the courts if politicians were doing their jobs and would quit passing blatantly unconstitutional laws to appease a handful of vocal idiots in their electorate....

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#9 Mar 7, 2013
JohnInToronto wrote:
However, if gay marriage were legal throughout the US, the economic impact would be a bit short-lived. After all, lots of folks who couldn't marry before would do so all at once, then the rate would return to the normal rate of heterosexual marriage plus presumably an additional 4-10%. Still, the additional percentage would help some wedding planner, banquet halls, florist and bakeries. These people are probably impacted by many other social changes as well. I would give a good guess the florists in Illinois have benefitted to a great degree from the major increase in the Hispanic population. Ever go to a Mexican funeral? It is like a corpse in a garden.
Yes, but just think how all those fabulous receptions will spur higher demands from heterosexual females.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#10 Mar 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
BIG news from Justice Kennedy while in Sacramento yesterday.
Read his remarks about 9 unelected justices deciding politically charged issues like gay marriage, healthcare, immigration.
Is this a clue how he's going to rule?
Could DOMA & Prop 8 both be upheld in favor of letting Congress & the states working it out through the democratic process?
Justice Scalia's blatant activism undoubtedly has the rest of the court considering a bit of humility in their role. It would be sad and ironic, indeed, if Scalia's "originalist" derision of the entire Senate and most of the House resulted in more moderate justices fearing to uphold the constitution.
Francisco dAnconia

Montpelier, VT

#11 Mar 7, 2013
they made this claim here in Vermont and it has turned out to be an illusion...
lots of advertising, lots of buzz, no extra money...

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#12 Mar 7, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
they made this claim here in Vermont and it has turned out to be an illusion...
lots of advertising, lots of buzz, no extra money...
Aw shucks! Hasn't the gay divorce industry that you were planning to cash in on materialized? Too bad for you.

Nobody ever predicted a boom that would be felt outside the wedding industry. I did the research and showed you the testimony before. Obviously, you chose not to pay attention, so I'm not going to go to all that work again.

I think the projected business boost was in the tens of millions of dollars. Even in a small state like Vermont, that's small potatoes unless you're the direct beneficiary.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#13 Mar 7, 2013
eJohn wrote:
This is the only text I can find online that references what I think you're referring to (and it's posted on hundreds of copycat news sites):
<quoted text>
If this is what you're referring to, I interpret it much differently than it sounds like you have. I think he's indicating some level of frustration that they HAVE to continually decide these issues because politicians are not doing their jobs.
I would agree with him on that.
But then, under our system, NO case regarding the constitutionality of a law would ever be reviewed by the courts if politicians were doing their jobs and would quit passing blatantly unconstitutional laws to appease a handful of vocal idiots in their electorate....
So your interpretation of his statement is more along the lines of "if you don't like our decisions, then stop making us decide these cases in the first place"?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#14 Mar 7, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Justice Scalia's blatant activism undoubtedly has the rest of the court considering a bit of humility in their role. It would be sad and ironic, indeed, if Scalia's "originalist" derision of the entire Senate and most of the House resulted in more moderate justices fearing to uphold the constitution.
All the more reason to get Scalia off the court.
Francisco dAnconia

Montpelier, VT

#15 Mar 7, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw shucks! Hasn't the gay divorce industry that you were planning to cash in on materialized? Too bad for you.
Nobody ever predicted a boom that would be felt outside the wedding industry. I did the research and showed you the testimony before. Obviously, you chose not to pay attention, so I'm not going to go to all that work again.
I think the projected business boost was in the tens of millions of dollars. Even in a small state like Vermont, that's small potatoes unless you're the direct beneficiary.
oh no, it was going to be a full blown gay tourist destination...
we were going to be 6 Rainbow Flags!!

it didn't happen..in fact the demand for gay marriages is LOW...

you also argued for days that the gay marriage movement was homegrown in VT until I showed you it wasn't...so your credibility is not 100 %...
Francisco dAnconia

Montpelier, VT

#16 Mar 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
All the more reason to get Scalia off the court.
I would love for them to hear what you guys are saying at the court...they would consider it great fiction...

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#17 Mar 7, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
oh no, it was going to be a full blown gay tourist destination...
we were going to be 6 Rainbow Flags!!
it didn't happen..in fact the demand for gay marriages is LOW...
you also argued for days that the gay marriage movement was homegrown in VT until I showed you it wasn't...so your credibility is not 100 %...
So where are those projections of a huge boom in the tourist industry? Let's see the numbers.

Look at this article. It projects $100,000,000 for the state of Illinois. I'll bet Chicago spends that much every week collecting garbage. Some boom.

Like I say: If you're not directly affected, you won't notice.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#18 Mar 7, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
I would love for them to hear what you guys are saying at the court...they would consider it great fiction...
We would love for them to read YOUR posts. smile

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#19 Mar 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
So your interpretation of his statement is more along the lines of "if you don't like our decisions, then stop making us decide these cases in the first place"?
What would be remarkable is if he actually came out and said it. Neither you nor I even thought of that angle in our discussion on another thread.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#20 Mar 7, 2013
O'Neill, William F.(1977)[1971]. With Charity Toward None: An Analysis of Ayn Rand's Philosophy. New York: Littlefield, Adams & Company. ISBN 0-8226-0179-6. OCLC 133489.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 15
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 18 min Terra Firma 15,420
Anti-gay Benham brother explains how he saved a... 23 min david traversa 7
Is Jeb Bush 'evolving' on same-sex marriage and... 40 min WeTheSheeple 14
White Supremacists Join Rally Against Gay Marri... 43 min WeTheSheeple 80
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 52 min KiMare 57,785
Catholics tell gays to ditch sex (May '14) 56 min Sherlayne 20
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 1 hr KiMare 3,912
Transgender Bruce Jenner will be lesbian after ... 1 hr Gary 95
Biggest Gay Lies (May '14) 2 hr Delbert 3,214
Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 2 hr GayleWood 1,054
More from around the web