, 2014 (WCIV 1). The historic day was filled with love and support
from families around the country and the community in general. It was also a day where they found a peace of mind after the stress they received from the previous month where they had the marriage license and the wedding date set, but only to be taken away by the state’s Attorney
General once he filed appeals against the marriages. “‘We were so excited to apply for the marriage license so when they took it away from us, it was like pulling the rug out from under our feet. Everything we were excited about just came crashing down’” (qtd. in WCIV 1). But then the wedding proceeded which allowed the couple to feel like they are truly married and finally allowed to have a family of their own (WCIV 1). Changes like these are happening all over the country, but the heated debate still goes on. One of the most common arguments is that people should not have their taxes going towards something they strictly believe is wrong
(Marcellino et al. 1). Once gay marriages are legalized, benefits going to heterosexual couples would naturally go to samesex couples. Those benefits include claiming a tax exemption for a spouse, receiving social security payments from a deceased spouse, and coverage by a spouse’s health insurance policy. While this is true, the taxes the people will be spending legalizing samesex couples will eventually come back and help the state or country economically
(Marcellino et al. 35). A decade long study by M.V. Lee Badgett and other economists concluded that planning marriages would make at least $1.5 billion dollars because of all the necessities of a wedding ceremony (Badgett 3).
Legalizing same sexmarriage should not be about believing what people think it is
morally wrong or right, but factually based on the better of the economy and for the country as a whole. At UCLA School of Law, researchers studied the economics of those 11 states where samesex marriage is prohibited (Chokshi 1). The results were shocking and saw that the states would make more than $464 million in their first year of legalizing samesex marriages (Chokshi
1). Based off of real life situations, New York’s Marriage Equality Act brought $259 million to the city after only a year (Covert 3). Given these reasons, the South Carolina Supreme Court should legalize samesex marriage because it would bring financial gain to federal and state governments, allow samesex couples to receive the same insurance benefits as heterosexual couples, and make it easier for samesex couples to adopt, providing stable homes for children who would otherwise be left in foster care.
Economic stability is the key to a successful and generally satisfied nation. During hard
times, governments need all the money they can get to steady the economy and provide better living conditions for the less fortunate. The government is turning a blind eye to the problems samesex couples are currently facing just to make more money. For example, the U.S. government was sued by Edie Windsor when her wife passed away because of the expenses she had to pay, which was about $363,000 in federal estate taxes (Badgett 2). The government would have collected less federal estate tax revenue if their marriage was official under the federal law.
(Badgett 2).
In reality though, the government can accrue more money from various taxes if they acknowledge samesex couples and marriages. Logically thinking, not all samesex couples would be a perfect match for each other like any other couple, so divorce would probably end up
increase tax revenues when the marriage penalty is collected by the federal income tax system
(Badgett 1). In the same study done by Badgett, he predicted that legalizing gay marriages could further bring money to the state and the federal government because a lot goes into planning a wedding ceremony. If the couples were to be officially wed, thousands of couples would not hesitate to plan a wedding with the minimum flowers, food, and entertainment. As stated earlier, the purchases would at least bring in $1.5 billion and without a question in doubt, it would make millions in sales tax revenue for both state and local governments (Badgett 1). The
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) held a meeting in 2004 that analyzed the outcomes of what would be if the federal government declared samesex marriages legitimate (Covert 2). They looked at the benefits of marriages, especially the big ones like Social Security and federal taxes.
The CBO discovered that an extra $10 billion in the budget would exist for the next ten years if the federal government recognized and legalized samesex marriages in all states. They also predicted that tax revenues would increase from $500 million to $700 million yearly from 2011 to 2014 (Covert 2). It is not only the country that would see these results, but also the states.
Maine conducted a study on marriage equality in 2009 and in that study they discovered that if states allowed the marriages of samesex couples, the state could increase their budget by $7.9 million a year (Covert 23).
Once a couple is married, they will receive all the insurance benefits of being married as
it states in the introduction. This rule does not quite reach the homosexual couples, which can cause complications for the couple:
The federal Defense of Marriage Act denies members of married same gender households access and benefits equivalent to those available to households headed by married parents or different
genders, such as (1) Social Security and related programs, (2) housing and food stamps, (3) federal civilian and military service benefits, (4) employment benefits, (5) immigration and nationality status, (6) remedies and protections for crimes and family violence, and (7) certain loans and financial. (Pawelski et al. 827)
Based on a study done by two New York Times reporters, about $500,000 will be taken from samesex couples just because they cannot get married, which keeps them from getting employers’ spousal health insurance along with many other drawbacks (Badgett 2). Therefore, samesex couples will remain uninsured and later when they have a complication that needs treatment they cannot afford, it eventually ends up costing all the tax payers (Badgett 2). Then in early 2014, a new policy was passed authorizing samesex couples that were married in the 17 states and the District of Columbia to an unbiased use of spousal coverage (Andrews 2). This policy does not take into account where they currently reside or their current policy, like other heterosexual couples. Although this policy was a big step towards equal rights for all couples, it does not, however, apply to those in domestic partnership or civil unions (Andrews 2).
Not all people agree with this policy, though. Opponents argue that some people should
not have their tax dollars used to support something that is against their beliefs. On December th 17
, 2009, the CBO estimated that the cost of the federal government of extending employment
benefits to samesex domestic partners of certain federal employees would be $596 million in mandatory spending and $320 million in discretionary spending between 2010 and 2019
(Marcellino, et al. 4). While it is true that Social Security and the Federal Employees Health
Benefits program will cost the government more, the government will eventually diminish
spending by about $100 million to $200 million a year from 2010 to 2014 by saving money from
Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid, and Medicare (Covert 2).
While this debate continues on, other real problems continue to grow. For example, the
growing number of children being left without proper parents. In the United States, 100,000 children are waiting to be adopted while over 500,000 children are in the welfare system (Farr,
Forssell and Patterson 164). Currently, some states in the United States do not allow adoptions by samesex couples at all by banning the samesex couples or banning unmarried couples from adopting altogether (Farr 165). Prohibiting perfectly capable couples from adopting children simply increases the amount of children left without proper guardians. The ongoing debate argues that children should be raised by both a mom and a dad, and that children of samesex couples are probably more prone to problems concerning physiological adjustment, peer relationships, and identification of themselves (Farr 165). This is a justified statement because there are a lot of studies done backing it up, but other studies done on the positive or neutral effects of samesex parents on the children were recently concocted. A July 2010 study done at the Williams Institute at UCLA found that children of gay fathers were “as welladjusted as those adopted by heterosexual parents” (Farr 175). Studies concluded that, “children adopted early in life by lesbian, gay, and heterosexual parents appeared to be thriving.” The study also found that the children were properly developing their own genders stating that it did not matter if the parents were gay, lesbian, or heterosexual, boys showcased typical behaviors of other boys in that age. In these studies, mostly welleducated and financially successful families were use for of the research proving that if those parents have a stable lifestyle and are able to provide and care for the children properly, the problems that are frequently mentioned would not be as big of
an issue (Farr 165). As these studies show, adoptions should solely be based on the how well the parents can devote their lives into raising a child.
The future of a child is strongly reflective of the parent and the role they played in the
child’s life. They need the basic needs of love from a healthy and stable household with reasonable adults in order for the children to reach their full potential as an adult (Pawelski et al.
827). As stated by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP),”’ children’s wellbeing is affected much more by their relationships with their parents, their parents’ sense of competence and security, and the presences of social and economic support for the family than by the gender or the sexual orientation of their parents’” (Pawelski et al. 827). It was discovered that 646,464 households had samesex parents and they are raising about 115,000 children around or below the age of 18 through the 2010 US Census (Gartrell 34). Children brought up in those types of households are practically spread out throughout the whole United States with children being raised by single homosexual parents. If put together there are about 2 million children being brought up by a gay or lesbian parent. The numbers will probably continue to grow in the future, but some people are still for the ideal family properly bringing up a child (Gartrell 34). It is logical to think that children being brought up in a stable, normal house would be the safest for the children. However, 50% of heterosexual couples in their first marriage will likely end up in a divorce in about seven to eight years (Gartrell 34). With these divorces, 65% of mothers will gain physical and legal custody of their children, while the fathers do not get custody whatsoever. This means that out of those 50% who has a child, the child will not live in the ideal family that so many people push for (Gartrell 34).
A continuing study conducted by the US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study
(NLLFS) found results that actually showed better outcomes for adolescents being raised by samesex couples (Gartrell 30, 32). For example, one of the analyses concluded that “17year old
NNLFS girls and boys were rated significantly higher in social, school/academic and total competence and significantly lower in social, rulebreaking, aggressive, and externalizing problem behavior than the comparisons group” (Gartrell 32). They also showed higher levels in many other aspects of life like social skills, school/academic, and “total competence than gender matched normative samples of American teenagers” (Gartrell 33). This might be the case due to the commitments the NLLFS mothers made even before their child was born and after the child was born (Gartrell 3334). Once the child was born, the mothers keenly took a part of the child’s education and stay connected to them no matter what (Gartrell 34).
In conclusion, samesex marriage overall has a positive effect economically. Samesex
marriage being legalized by the South Carolina legislator would bring financial success to both federal and state government, make life safer and easier for samesex couples because they could take advantage of insurance benefits, and lastly the adoption process would be so much easier for samesex couples which would result in fewer children without proper parents. The main disagreement is that the people who do not believe and do not support samesex couples should not have their taxes going towards providing a safe and equal life for those samesex couples.
Looking at the studies and the statistics, in the long run the government would be making more money through tax revenues, sale revenues, and other taxes collected from married couples by the government. Then government would use that money for the better of the country or the state. Katie Bradacs and Tracie Goodwin are a couple that resides in Lexington, South Carolina
and on January, 2014, they filed a lawsuit against South Carolina because of its ban on samesex marriage (Katchen 1). They were the first couple in South Carolina to officially dispute the ban when Goodwin was suddenly fired from her job after the couple enrolled Jordan, Bradacs’s
13year old, using Goodwin’s address. Goodwin was a police officer for the Springdale Police
Department and an Air Force veteran, but that did not matter when she was fired from her job.
“‘Times are changing, things are changing,” Bradacs said, “South Carolina is just slow’” (qtd. in
Katchen 4). She voices the frustrations of many lesbian and gay couples who currently reside in
South Carolina on its inequality and insensitivity towards them. If people saw the logic side to this issue and not just what they believe or hear is wrong, this argument would have a better chance of change in South Carolina. Thanks to people like Bradacs and Goodwin, judges ruled th South Carolina samesex marriage ban to end on November 18
, 2014 (WCIV 1).
Clarity/ Wording Corrections
● Nonsupporters of this ongoing debate continuously argues that children should strictly be raised by both a mom and a dad (Fitzgibbons 42). They also argue that children of samesex couples are more likely to be prone to problems concerning physiological adjustment, peer relationships, and identifications of their gender (Farr 165).
●
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
After meeting through a pen pal service, appellant Beatriz S. Irving, who was living in the Philippines, and respondent Gilbert J. Irving, who was living in the United States, exchanged love letters and telephone calls for nearly ten years. In 2002, Gilbert obtained government approval for Beatriz to immigrate to the United States. The parties married therafter. From June 2002 to October 2002, the parties lived together as husband and wife. During the time, Beatriz never became pregnant despite the couple’s continued efforts. In October 2002, Beatriz was diagnosed with tuberculosis and moved out of Gilbert’s residence, in part because Gilbert was concerned that the disease was contagious. In November 2002; Gilbert filed a complaint for annulment, alleging that Beatriz had misrepresented that she wanted to conceive his child.…
- 262 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
Deborah Evans Met Aaron Conway and his wife Barb Conway five years ago as part of the religious sect Canyon County Family Society that has existed for 25 years with 120 members, which is part of the Mormon Church which strongly believes in polygamist marriages. Ms. Evans moved in with the Conway’s two years ago, in which time Mr. Conway and Ms. Evans began dating even though he has been married to his wife Barb for 10 years, and have five children together. In 2011Mr. Conway decided he wanted to be married to Deborah Evans as well for a second wife, as it is part of their religious beliefs to do and applied for a marriage license in canyon County, Utah. Mr. Conway and Ms. Evans then proceeded to the county clerk’s office and applied for their marriage license where they were denied, and informed at that point that polygamy in the state of Utah is not legal, and since Mr. Conway was already married, they could not get a marriage license. The Conway’s and Ms. Evans at this point sued the state of Utah in trial court for their right to practice polygamy based off of their religious beliefs. The trial court ruled against them, and denied the group the marriage license. At this point the Conway’s and Ms. Evans would like to appeal the trial court decision.…
- 1347 Words
- 6 Pages
Better Essays -
The case involved 72-year-old Barronelle Stutzman, who denied services for the wedding of same-sex couple [insert names here] in 2012. Stutzman had served the couple previously, but said she could not provide services for the wedding out of concern that doing so would cause her to participate in the ceremony which is against her religious conscience.…
- 433 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
Blood brother is a tragic tale about two twins who were parted at birth and as a result, led very different lives. The author, Willy Russell portrays the circumstances in which the twins were conceived, born and parted and also gives us an insight into how society has the influence of shaping individuals according to the classes they are in.…
- 1269 Words
- 6 Pages
Good Essays -
health coverage, and protection in the event of the relationship ending. On December 17, 2009,…
- 1513 Words
- 7 Pages
Better Essays -
In June of 1958, Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving married in the District of Columbia. They were residents of Virginia but due to Virginia’s laws they weren’t able to marry within their state. The state of Virginia prevented marriages based on racial classification. After the couple married they returned to their home state in Caroline County where they were then charged for violating Virginia’s ban on interracial marriages. The Loving’s went to court and was sentenced to a year in jail. However, the judge suspended the trial for twenty-five years on the condition that the Loving’s wouldn’t return to Virginia for those twenty-five years.…
- 595 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Gay marriage supporters consider that permitting gay marriages ensures the couples some legitimate and financial security.…
- 340 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
Driving in across the Mojave from Los Angeles, one sees the signs way out on the desert, looming up from that moonscape of rattle-snakes and mesquite, even before the Las Vegas lights appear like a mirage on the horizon: “GETTING MARRIED? Free License Information First Strip Exit.” One hundred and seventy-one couples were pronounced man and wife in the name of Clark County and the State of Nevada that night, sixty-seven of them by a single justice of the peace, Mr. James Brennan. “I could’ve married them en masse, but they’re people, not cattle. People expect more when they get married,” said Brennan.…
- 553 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Gay marriage seems to be one of the biggest topics today. There are people who agree and disagree about gay marriage because of religious factors. Religious groups, for example, Christians are divided by this issue. “Some Christians argue that it is immortal and disgracing God’s only wish which is to make children. Others argue that same sex couples are created by God, and should be able to have the same rights as any other regular couple” (Debate).There are some religions that just open reject the idea of gay marriage. “An example would be the Islamic faith, because the story of Lot in Sodom condemns homosexuality” (Debate). Same sex marriages are a problem today because people have different views based on their religion, and the fact that back then it was unheard of to even be thought as…
- 689 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
I listened as Trina spoke about love, marriage, God’s will for husband and wife, and lead the reciting of the vows. Trina prayed over their marriage that God would bless them, and then present them to us for the first time as Mr. and Mrs. Anderson. When we all stood up watching them leave the church, everyone was a bit surprised when the entire wedding party jumped off the stage and danced down the aisle to “Float On” by Modest Mouse.…
- 598 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Living in a country known for its freedom, an individual wouldn't stop and consider that they would need a law to be passed to marry someone they love. In the most recent poll over whether or not gay marriage should be legalized has been taken you can see that the united states supports it more than oppose it:…
- 715 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
In the spring of 1943, the two would be united as one. Life in this time period was simplistic just like Katie had dreamed of her wedding being. Katie had dreamed of her wedding from the time she was a young girl and the reality was it was time to put those dreams into action. She scrambled through old magazines and newspapers to find the perfect venue, the most exquisite flowers, and the delicacies of a desert. Katie knew from the moment she became engaged that she would wear her mother’s old wedding gown. She took it to a seamstress to make it the perfect fit for her slim frame. It took months for the day to come together, but with those long stressful days behind her the big day was finally here. Close family and few friends gathered at…
- 1715 Words
- 7 Pages
Good Essays -
His expression was one of pure adoration and contentment as, caressing the skin of her waist and abdomen with his nails, he tugged her closer, and planted a kiss on Lexi's forehead. After the stresses of the day, and the tension relieved by powerful orgasm, he was fully satiated and totally spent. If nothing else, the aftereffects of their respective climaxes would hopefully allow the two to obtain a restful night's sleep in each others arms, before they woke to the reality of what the next day brought. "No wonder I want you to marry…
- 723 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Throughout history, humans acted in what is known as societal normality. Whether that be how one caries him/herself, how they dress or what their sexual orientation is. Regardless of what it was, society expected certain behavior from individuals, this is very common, even now. For laws to be passed, the law in question needs to be supported by many. Individuals who identify as LGBTQA+ aren’t following societal norms and because of this being an individual who identifies as LGBTQA’s is usually looked down upon. Unfortunately, many people don’t support LGBTQA+ and because of this many countries have laws against sodomy. Since LGBTQA+’s isn’t very supported majority of countries also don’t support. Countries like Jamaica used to have strict laws…
- 302 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
And I remember I tenderly imagined how, at this very moment, my mother would be moving slowly about the narrow bedroom I had left behind for ever, folding up and putting away all my little relics, the tumbled garments I would not need any more, the scores for which there had been no room in my trunks, the concert programmes I'd abandoned; she would linger over this torn ribbon and that faded photograph with all the half-joyous, half-sorrowful emotions of a woman on her daughter's wedding day. And, in the midst of my bridal triumph, I felt a pang of loss as if, when he put the gold band on my finger, I had, in some way, ceased to be her child in becoming his wife.…
- 736 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays