I have a firm belief in the statement written in the Declaration that we have a God-given right to the pursuit of happiness. I believe that love is important, and part of that right to pursue happiness is the right to live with the one you love…for that reason, I support a form of civil marriage for anyone who wants to declare their intention to commit to a life with another person. There should be civil and legal benefits accorded to that commitment.
However, marriage, and the full gamut of legal beneifts that society gives to marriage, is for a single purpose, to provide the best conditions for the raising of a family. Those conditions, the best conditions, mind you, are the raising of children in a relationship with a mother and father. That is the ideal for which we strive, and that is the reason we provide such generous benefits to heterosexual couples who marry…because any heterosexual couple has the potential to, at some point in their life, be the mother and father of a child. That doesn’t mean that the gamut of alternative situations, polyandry, polygamy, single-parent situations, should be illegal…just that it should not be encouraged with marriage benefits.
There is no Constitutional right to marry whomever you wish. In fact, even among heterosexuals, there are restrictions upon whom one can marry; you cannot marry your sister, for instance. The reality is that if same-sex marriage is legislated or decided in court as a “civil right”, not granting that right to any other couple or group can’t be determined to be anything other than discriminatory…ie. a civil rights violation. This is not a slippery slope we’ve headed down, it’s a blatant misrepresentation of facts that has been embraced and promoted for a small minority by the leftists who are in power.
Same-sex marriage has been, and continues to be argued the same as racial discrimination. The argument is a lie, yet enough people have allowed certain legislatures and courts to promote this lie. There has not been one judicial decision or legislative vote that has been based on honesty. It’s been a manipulation of the constitution that is beyond belief. The constitution has been flushed in lieu of promoting “progressive” ideology.
The decision by the State of New York is a signal that New York intends to follow in the path of California, using high taxes and unpopular social decisions to drive business and people away from the State…a sad sign that New York is in decline.
There IS a law of unintended consequences…and when we see New York taking up the same path as California, high taxes, unpopular social issues, and also see people and business fleeing New York, though supporters deny the connection, one has to wonder when New York will be declaring the same level of financial distress that California is now experiencing.
Between 2000 and 2008, the Empire State had a net domestic outflow of more than 1.5 million, the biggest exodus of any state, with most hailing from New York City. The departures also have perilous budget consequences, since they tend to include residents who are better off than those arriving. Statewide, departing families have income levels 13% higher than those moving in, while in New York County (home of Manhattan) the differential was even more severe. Those moving elsewhere had an average income of $93,264, some 28% higher than the
$72,726 earned by those coming in.
In 2006 alone, that swap meant the state lost $4.3 billion in taxpayer income. Add that up from 2001 through 2008, and it translates into annual net income losses somewhere near $30 billion. That trend is part of a larger march for New York: In 1950 the state accounted for 19% of all Americans, but by 2000 that number had fallen to 7%. The city’s main saving grace has been its welcome mat for foreign immigrants, who have helped to replace some of those who flee.
As the study’s authors, E.J. McMahon and Wendell Cox, suggest, no single reason can be fingered for a million migrants seeking their fortunes across state lines, but one place to start is New York’s notorious state and local tax burden. According to the Tax Foundation, between 1977 and 2008, New York has ranked first or second in the country for its state-local tax burden compared to the U.S. average.
In the years considered by the Empire Center study, New York’s state and local tax burden ranged between 11% and 12% of income. The peak year for taxes, 2004, was followed by the peak year for departures—as New York lost nearly 250,000 people to other states in 2005. And that’s before another big tax hike this year.