Monday, October 18, 2004
Pros, Cons, and Evidence
I keep saying we need decent, affordable healthcare. We can afford it, and we could do it, if only people weren't to bloody stupid. I also say we need to have legal recognition of gay men and lesbians' committed relationships, as we do for the straights.
There's plenty of room to debate on the former issue, but frankly there is none on the latter: if you think gay couples should not be afforded equal rights, please close your browser window, turn off the lights, lock your doors, close the blinds...maybe you can avoid suffocating on your on arrogant self-righteous pseudo-piety for a little while longer. There are no sensible arguments against it, they all boil down to bigotry (and yes, religion can and does promote bigotry too).
These two items intersect, now and again: 76 percent of straight Indiana men would get a civil union with another man if it meant he could have health benefits. Now, someone is gonna say, 'but that's the kind of abuse to the system we're trying to avoid by banning gay marriage!' Yes. And it is why actual, equal, real marriage is preferable to stupid civil unions. Straight people have sham marriages all the time, I had very good friends in college who married for financial reasons, and it worked out brilliantly for them (as far as I know). If you have to go through the rigmarole of marriage licenses, divorce proceedings, etc., you're less likely (unless you're a celebrity)
to go through the hassle.
Unless your health is at risk. People will do a lot of things to keep themselves healthy (or to perceive themselves as doing so). Demand for healthcare is pretty inelastic (3-5% based on recent studies we've done). Don't want people getting sham marriages for healthcare? Give them decent options.
/rant.
UPDATE: It's been pointed out that the Hoosier Gazette is a parody site. Doesn't matter. My above statements still stand, because I know people in real life who've done similar things.
There's plenty of room to debate on the former issue, but frankly there is none on the latter: if you think gay couples should not be afforded equal rights, please close your browser window, turn off the lights, lock your doors, close the blinds...maybe you can avoid suffocating on your on arrogant self-righteous pseudo-piety for a little while longer. There are no sensible arguments against it, they all boil down to bigotry (and yes, religion can and does promote bigotry too).
These two items intersect, now and again: 76 percent of straight Indiana men would get a civil union with another man if it meant he could have health benefits. Now, someone is gonna say, 'but that's the kind of abuse to the system we're trying to avoid by banning gay marriage!' Yes. And it is why actual, equal, real marriage is preferable to stupid civil unions. Straight people have sham marriages all the time, I had very good friends in college who married for financial reasons, and it worked out brilliantly for them (as far as I know). If you have to go through the rigmarole of marriage licenses, divorce proceedings, etc., you're less likely (unless you're a celebrity)
to go through the hassle.
Unless your health is at risk. People will do a lot of things to keep themselves healthy (or to perceive themselves as doing so). Demand for healthcare is pretty inelastic (3-5% based on recent studies we've done). Don't want people getting sham marriages for healthcare? Give them decent options.
/rant.
UPDATE: It's been pointed out that the Hoosier Gazette is a parody site. Doesn't matter. My above statements still stand, because I know people in real life who've done similar things.
Comments:
Post a Comment
