Gays Denied Marriage: The Economic Cost

Gays Denied Marriage: The Economic Cost

There are 394 comments on the WISW-AM Columbia story from Mar 28, 2013, titled Gays Denied Marriage: The Economic Cost. In it, WISW-AM Columbia reports that:

What is the cost to gay people of not being allowed to marry? A University of Massachusetts economist believes the lifetime cost averages $500,000 per couple.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WISW-AM Columbia.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#64 Apr 11, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing is more American than defending the tradition of marriage.
A man, a woman and a family. Gay couples can't produce a family. I respect the freedom and equality you have now, it's no different from that of any other single person.
Nothing is more American that defending equal protection under the laws.

You've been incapable of indicating a single way in which traditional marriage is even effected, much less harmed, by allowing marriage equality.

Please list for us the numerous, clearly obvious, ways in which your marriage has been altered since gay marriage became legal in Massachusetts. Be specific. Oh, and try to think actual damages, which would actually allow you to bring a lawsuit to stop the practice.

This should be amusing. Or inane.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#65 Apr 11, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing is more American that defending equal protection under the laws.
I agree. Gay marriage has nothing to do with equal protection.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#66 Apr 11, 2013
Wondering wrote:
I agree. Gay marriage has nothing to do with equal protection.
Which is an argument that you still lack the intelligence to rationally defend. Don't worry, it isn't just you, no one else can offer a particularly rational defense either, because it is an irrational argument.

Why don't you spout some more vitriol from your heros at the hate group massresistance, who write all of your material? That tends to be amusing, if utterly irrational.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#67 Apr 11, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is an argument that you still lack the intelligence to rationally defend.
This from a fool that admitted he can't tie his own shoes and claims 1 = 2. Too funny.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#68 Apr 11, 2013
Wondering wrote:
This from a fool that admitted he can't tie his own shoes and claims 1 = 2. Too funny.
Where did I do that? Be specific.

Or are you making things up again because you have no argument?

Do you ever tire of looking like a fool? Do you ever tire of being the one that makes you look foolish?

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#69 Apr 11, 2013
fr wondering:

>...I respect the freedom and equality you have now,...<

Didn't mommy ever teach you not to LIE?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#70 Apr 12, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did I do that? Be specific.
I understand your embarrassment. In weaker moments I actually have a little sympathy for you, mostly for your parents though.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#71 Apr 12, 2013
Pattysboi wrote:
fr wondering:
>...I respect the freedom and equality you have now,...<
Didn't mommy ever teach you not to LIE?
I never called a married couple a "family."
I called them a married couple. To do otherwise would be a lie.
I see that your mommy failed.

“Come and get it! ”

Since: Jan 09

Traverse City

#72 Apr 12, 2013
There is no such thing as gay "marriage"...

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#73 Apr 12, 2013
Sneaky Pete wrote:
There is no such thing as gay "marriage"...
Incorrect.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#76 Apr 13, 2013
Wondering wrote:
I understand your embarrassment. In weaker moments I actually have a little sympathy for you, mostly for your parents though.
Why should I be embarrassed that you either make things up or forget what you are talking about?

I can't be held accountable for your incompetence.

Feel free to indicate where I made the point you indicate. I have no fear that you will, because it only happened in your alternate reality.

“Come and get it! ”

Since: Jan 09

Traverse City

#78 Apr 13, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Incorrect.
Nope. I'm absolutely correct. Sorry you can't accept it. Come on down out of kooky liberal land and join the rest of us in reality.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#79 Apr 13, 2013
Sneaky Pete wrote:
Nope. I'm absolutely correct. Sorry you can't accept it. Come on down out of kooky liberal land and join the rest of us in reality.
Reality requires equal protection of the laws. You may rejoin reality whenever you like.

“Come and get it! ”

Since: Jan 09

Traverse City

#80 Apr 13, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Reality requires equal protection of the laws. You may rejoin reality whenever you like.
The nuthouse called. You're due back by 5...

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#81 Apr 13, 2013
Sneaky Pete wrote:
The nuthouse called. You're due back by 5...
Hmm, funny how absent a valid argument, you post irrelevant drivel.

What, pray tell, is crazy about demanding the equal protection of the laws that is constitutionally guaranteed?

Insanity would not be demanding one's constitutional rights.

Tell me, when the nuthouse called, did they reach you in your room on the ward?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#82 Apr 13, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm, funny how absent a valid argument, you post irrelevant drivel.
What, pray tell, is crazy about demanding the equal protection of the laws that is constitutionally guaranteed?
Insanity would not be demanding one's constitutional rights.
Tell me, when the nuthouse called, did they reach you in your room on the ward?
Show me the constitutional guarantee that promises gays can marry.
BTW, I don't think you're nuts, I think you're stupid.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#83 Apr 13, 2013
Wondering wrote:
Show me the constitutional guarantee that promises gays can marry.
BTW, I don't think you're nuts, I think you're stupid.
You aren't so bright, are you Wondering?

Does every state in the union allow marriage, yes or no?
" All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." US Constitution, 14th Amendment, Section 1

Before such a right may be abridged, doing so must serve a compelling state interest.
"For a court to apply strict scrutiny, the legislature must either have significantly abridged a fundamental right with the law's enactment or have passed a law that involves a suspect classification. Suspect classifications have come to include race, national origin, religion, alienage, and poverty."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/strict_scrutin...

Marriage has long been held to be a fundamental right by the US Supreme Court.
http://www.afer.org/blog/14-supreme-court-cas...

Fundamental rights may not be put to a vote.
"One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials...

All of this has been explained to you time and time again, it is hardly my fault if you lack the mental capacity to understand it. Feel free to make a factually supported argument to the contrary. I don't think you can.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#84 Apr 13, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
You aren't so bright, are you Wondering?
BWAHAHAHAHA! Justice Dumbass, you crack me up!

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#85 Apr 13, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
BWAHAHAHAHA! Justice Dumbass, you crack me up!
Inappropriate laughter aside, I'm guessing that you can't refute a thing Lides has posted.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#86 Apr 13, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Inappropriate laughter aside, I'm guessing that you can't refute a thing Lides has posted.
Justice Dumbass has been refuted time and again. He insists on displaying his lack of understanding when it comes to the simplest concepts. In his tiny mind he's right. The rest of the world, excluding the minority that subscribe to his wrongness, believe otherwise.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Social Security Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News If Donald Trump Was President, Here's What Woul... (Oct '15) 2 hr barefoot2626 10,995
News Undocumented U.S. immigrants cannot collect ret... 4 hr tomin cali 8
Getting married to a Filipino Lady Tue oriana68 1
News Donald Trump's first general election TV ad tou... Mon Lawrence Wolf 49
News Civil Rights Group Sues BMV | WBNS-10TV, Centra... (Nov '09) Mon Victoria Parks 319
Social security with minor child, divorced Aug 21 Stu 1
News New anti-Toomey ad is rolled out Aug 19 FICA ponzi scheme 1
More from around the web