NOM BLOG

New Study by Prudential Insurance Shows the Wealth of LGBT People

 

Austin Ruse at the First Things First Thoughts blog:

"...Matthew Frank pointed out in these pages that recent Federal Court rulings scoff at the claim that LGBT persons are politically powerless.

... And now comes a new study from the financial services giant Prudential. The study looked at 1,401 LGBT persons aged 25-68 from “urban, suburban, and rural communities throughout the 50 states in August 2012.”

Rather than living in extreme poverty, or poverty of any kind, the study shows that gay individuals and couples are significantly better off than heterosexuals. They are more likely to be employed. They make significant more money. They have much higher levels of disposable income and have more in savings.

... A lawyer in Washington DC recently said the LGBT folks are the most powerful minority group our country has ever seen. They are lauded in the media and in the popular culture. They are better off by any financial measure. And their cause is championed by what Father Neuhaus called the “prestige media.” They are honored and promoted not just at Ivy League schools but in just about every college setting in the United States. And those who oppose them? They are vilified, driven from their jobs and from the public square.

Let us hope that the Supreme Court, which has taken up this issue, looks carefully at the real and privileged position of the homosexual community in the United States. We should all be so discriminated against."

6 Comments

  1. OvercameSSA
    Posted December 11, 2012 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    Liberal guilt, derivative of White guilt, provides undeserved accolades to those who have done nothing but be or claim to be victims. It's a rather condescending way to treat people, essentially implying that because you are pathetic, you should be treated better than others more deserving. Trophies for everybody!

  2. Publius
    Posted December 11, 2012 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

    This certainly casts doubt on the demands for the strictness levels of legal scrutiny, so crucial in recent court decisions attacking the federal DOMA.

    Gays powerless? When they ask the California legislature to jump, the usual question is "how high?"

  3. Publius
    Posted December 11, 2012 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

    The claim that gays are just like poor blacks under Jim Crow lacks credibility. I have long pointed this out. Compare, for example, the relative representation of blacks at Yale and gays at Yale. Call me when 20% of Yale is black. And gays are what percentage of the population?

    To note the striking financial success of gays is hardly anti-gay propaganda. Indeed, gays themselves have used the same evidence in the pink pound and pink dollar movements. It is arguably pro-gay propaganda. Gays (and others) have earned their wealth and are entitled to it. I am not particularly critical of the rich, unlike some liberal members of Congress or the Occupy movement.

    I believe all people, which of course includes all Jews and all Orthodox Jews, have every right to voice their opinions in the public square and influence votes accordingly based on their faith traditions, even as gays tell us that no valid political opinion should have a religious basis, that religion is a fairy tale, and that the book of Leviticus should be held in contempt and derision.

    My arguments have been primarily about constitutional law, and I have never expressed hatred against gays. I have been libertarian as regards the law and private behavior. I have no particular objection to Civil Unions. It is the redefinition of marriage into a genderless institution that I object to, because it will hurt women. Women are not fungible with men. The country rejected the so-called ERA, and the arguments included maintaining protections for women.

    Yet to degender marriage courts have applied the strict scrutiny standard as if gays were poor and powerless, like blacks under Jim Crow. This is counterfactual and hence bad law.

    This is like the rich arguing for a flat tax since only a flat tax is equal. More tax cuts for the rich is not yet a popular notion. Indeed, some people hate the rich. I am waiting for the rich to turn that into a strict scrutiny argument, find a judge (who might even be rich) who favors a flat tax as the only equal tax, determine as matters of fact that the arguments against a flat tax are false and unconstitutional, and find a governor and attorney general that won’t appeal those findings so a higher court can’t reverse the “findings of fact,” and to deny others standing to appeal, even when a referendum overturns the court ruling. Sound familiar? No wonder the SCOTUS felt it necessary to take up the Prop 8 case when they could easily have picked another case.

  4. DN
    Posted December 12, 2012 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    Publius, your thoughts are a joke. You're pathetic.

  5. Ash
    Posted December 12, 2012 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    Yeah...gays are *really* a downtrodden and oppressed minority!

  6. Publius
    Posted December 12, 2012 at 11:32 pm | Permalink

    DN,

    Thank you for reading my comment. Did you start your life as a poor black child in the ghetto?

    Try comparing the gayest zip code neighborhoods and the blackest zip code neighborhoods.