NOM's Communications Director Thomas Peters engaged in a spirited debate on a wide range of issues surrounding marriage, corporate fairness, and the Supreme Court on CNN this weekend:
CNN has posted a transcript -- including this part about the so-called economic argument for redefining marriage:
[CNN HOST] KEILAR: But the point that I'm getting at is that when we talk about this as a business imperative, let's take a look at what this filing says. It says, recognizing the rights of same-sex couples to marry is more than a constitutional issue. It is a business imperative. So what do you think about that? Do you agree with that? Do you disagree with that? Is it about more than that? Is that not enough?
PETERS: I strongly disagree with it, because, first of all, the top 10 states for growth right now in this country, nine of them have marriage protection amendments. And so, you know, where this argument comes from is the left wing, UCLA Williams Institute, which has been peddling this argument for years, that gay marriage is an economic stimulus. The very states that are currently trying to [...] legalize gay marriage, like New York and California, are not exactly in an economic picture of well-being. So, look, strong states like Indiana are moving towards marriage protection amendments. North Carolina recently passed its marriage protection amendment by 61 percent. The fact of the matter is that protecting marriage protects children and it helps businesses.
KEILAR: But, Thomas, let me ask you this. Because you have businesses now that are saying, it's costing us money. They say and this obviously gets a little complicated, but they say, same-sex couples are required to pay a Federal income tax on health benefits provided to a spouse through an employer-sponsored health insurance plan. Some employers reimburse employees for the extra tax paid. That requires extra time and money. They say it's costing them money. Do you disagree with that?
PETERS: Well, let's look at -- you used the adjective complicated and you're right, it is complicated. But here's one complicating factor that I think is being ignored in this broader debate. You know, the president is arguing in the Supreme Court that gays and lesbians are politically powerless class. And now you've been telling me time and time again that all these corporations support redefining marriage.
So I would actually ask Brian [of the Human Rights Campaign], which is it? Are gays and lesbians actually a politically powerless class or do all these corporations, the vast majority of people support redefining marriage because you can't have it both ways -- I believe the majority of Americans believe in protecting marriage and I believe that gays and lesbians are an incredibly powerful political class that are trying to redefine marriage for all of us.
"...Americans deserve to know the facts about marriage as an antidote to child poverty. That’s especially true of at-risk youth. How many times does a young person hear that she should stay in school, wear her seatbelt, and not smoke? Will she ever hear that marriage is important to her and her children’s welfare? Do taxpayers realize the significance of marriage for alleviating child poverty—or do they only hear messages about how much more we need to spend on welfare programs? That’s what National Marriage Week aims to change.
Even if all the market reforms of the Washington think tanks, the Wall Street Journal, and Forbes Magazine were enacted, we’d still need to kiss the Great American Economy goodbye. Below the level of economic policy lies a society that is producing fewer people capable of hard work, especially married men with children. As the retreat from marriage continues apace, there are fewer and fewer of these men, resulting in a slowly, permanently decelerating economy.
Under Obamacare, Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.
It pays to be single -- that is, when it comes to high earners' tax bills.
An Annapolis company whose old-fashioned trolleys are iconic in the city's wedding scene has abandoned the nuptial industry rather than serve same-sex couples.
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.
Since the 2008 presidential campaign, when then-Sen. Barack Obama told the Rev. Rick Warren that he supported traditional marriage defined as the union of “one man and one woman,” the president’s position on this topic has “evolved,” and now, of course, has reversed.
“The facts show that states where the people have voted to preserve traditional marriage are the top performing states economically,” said Joseph Backholm, Chairman of Preserve Marriage Washington. “Rejecting Referendum 74 will not hurt Washington’s economy. If anything, it will help the economy. Research shows that states where voters rejected redefining marriage are the top performing states economically.”
The Golden Valley-based packaged foods giant has been the most prominent Minnesota corporate voice opposing the November ballot amendment, which would recognize marriage only as a union between a man and a woman.
