Is Gay Marriage a Social Issue or Just Another Money Grab

Is Gay Marriage a Social Issue or Just Another Money Grab

As a Libertarian, I think the notion that homosexual marriage is somehow a civil liberty is wrong. Marriage has never been originated by the state, to begin with, and as such is not a “civil liberty”. For people to even put the question to government, is ignorant in the first place.

What the “gay” [which I don’t even believe is a real distinction] people want is special dispensation to force private businesses to give them “rights” over an above their own self / business interests, i.e. insurance companies to be forced to throw out actuarial charts, documenting observable behavioral changes in humans that marry and have children, versus those that don’t and therefore are at lower risk for car accidents etc.

In the end this is not about a question of simply declaring a universal love for someone, it is about a lobby to make government force private business to do something, for money.

Until someone with some sense sheds light on this entire farce, everyone will be still debating this like it is some legitimate social issue, instead of the money issue it really is.

It is underhanded in the most vile sense of the word. Couch a money issue, inside of a social issue, with a heavy dose of guilt issues. It’s like the homosexual version of Inception.

For the very people talking about freedom, they are trying to force other “people” [businesses] to have their freedoms taken away.

This has never been about a civil liberty. In fact the entire debate is based on a blatant lie. Several national studies, recently conducted in the last year, found that only 15% of the entire “gay” population is even in a long term, committed relationship. So where is this outcry for legitimizing a “gay” relationship coming from? Certainly not the 85% who have no standing to even bring up the issue in a court of law, nor be redressed before congress. In fact that whole notion that there are these massive numbers of homosexuals out there is false also. The homosexual population is a mere 3%: 2% male and 1% female.

However, as we have seen, the best available data supports a lower estimate of 2.5 percent for male homosexuals and 1.4 percent for lesbians.

Again, this is about money, not civil rights; not civil liberties nor freedom. Almost no one in the national media even understands the ramifications of the issue, money.

Charts on Relationships


Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2001)
Source: Current Population Reports: U.S. Census Bureau (2002)

Source: 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census

Sources:Laumann, The Social Organization of Sexuality, 216; McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (1984): 252-253; Wiederman, “Extramarital Sex,” 170.

P.S.

Vermont

In April 2000, the governor of the state of Vermont signed a law instituting civil unions for homosexuals. The bill conferred 300 privileges and rights enjoyed by married couples upon same-sex partners who register their relationship with the town clerk and have their union solemnized by a member of the clergy or the justice of the peace.

Estimating the homosexual and lesbian population of Vermont: The number of homosexuals and lesbians in the state of Vermont may be estimated based on national studies. Contrary to the widely promulgated but inaccurate claims that up to ten percent of the population is homosexual, research indicates that homosexuals comprise one to three percent of the population. For example, a recent study in Demography relying upon three large data sets–the General Social Survey, the National Health and Social Life Survey, and the U.S. Census–estimated the number of exclusive male homosexuals in the general population to be 2.5 percent and the number of exclusive lesbians to be 1.4 percent.[21]

According to the 2000 Census, the adult population of Vermont is 461,304.[22] Based on theDemography study, a reasonable estimate of the number of homosexuals and lesbians in Vermont would be approximately 5,600 (2.5 percent of the adult male population) for male homosexuals, and approximately 3,300 (1.4 percent of the adult female population) for lesbians, for a total of approximately 8,900 homosexuals and lesbians. [Note: these are only rough approximations for purposes of statistical comparison.]

Number of homosexuals and lesbians in Vermont who have entered into civil unions: USA Today reports that, as of January 2004, only 936 homosexual or lesbian couples (for a total of 1,872 individuals) have entered into civil unions.[23] This indicates that only about 21 percent of the estimated homosexual and lesbian population of Vermont has entered into civil unions. Put another way, 79 percent of homosexuals and lesbians in Vermont choose not to enter into civil unions.

By contrast, in Vermont, heterosexual married couples outnumber cohabiting couples by a margin of 7 to 1, indicating a much higher level of desire on the part of heterosexual couples to legalize their relationships.[24]

Sources:U.S. Census Bureau, Married-Couple and Unmarried-Partner Households: 2000, 2; Black, “Demographics,” 141; U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000 Summary File 1; Bayles, “Vermont’s Gay Civil Unions,” 1; Census 2000 Special Reports, 4; Shane, “Many Swedes Say ‘I Don’t,'” 1; “ORL Backgrounder,” 1.
*Sources:Black, “Demographics,” 141; Census 2000 Special Reports, 4.

Finally, the entire issue of “gay” marriage is set on a backdrop of discrimination. Of course discrimination cannot be legislated away. But, what is telling is that one cannot discern off hand if someone is “gay” just by looking at them, outside of some blatant indication. That being said, the alleged discrimination that is reported might not be discrimination at all. What’s more, one would expect there to be reports of wide-spread discrimination, if one were to pay attention to the “gay” lobby.

Once again the DATA does not support this notion of widespread discrimination.

TYPES OF DISCRIMINATION ENCOUNTERED AS A COUPLE
Women(%) Men(%)
Employment benefits 58 40
Taxes 47 37
Insurance 46 34
Membership 20 11
Credit/banking 15 10
Employment 14 13
Housing 11 11
Hotels 6 6
Hospital visitation 6 2
Adoption 5 2
Foster care 3 2
Other 7 4
None/none indicated 23 34

What is telling is that the most talked about discrimination in the entire “gay” marriage issue is about Hospital visitation. However, as the DATA shows, only 2% of “gay” couples encountered any discrimination in Hospital visitation. The highest point of discrimination reported was among Employment benefits. However, with a casual glance at the prior data, one finds that most “gay” couples change partners within one year. Is it discriminatory for companies to rightly deny benefits to an ever changing partner of a “gay” employee. Is it discriminatory to deny insurance benefits to an employee that always changes partners on a yearly basis. This   is clearly supported by the DATA: a staggering 42% of all “gay” relationships do not see a 3rd year and a huge 71% never see a 7th year.

So do insurance companies, which base a majority of their coverage decisions based on regular human behavioral patterns, have a business right to deny coverage of an ever changing partner? Can an insurance company cover a married employee when all DATA points to a 57% chance that the employee will remain married for at least 15 years or a 50% chance he will remain married for more than 20 years? Depending on the job, 20 years of continuous employment can qualify an employee for retirement. It is then reasonable for an insurance company to agree to cover an employee in a group where 20 years of a continuous partner is assured, versus an employee in a group where not even 1 year of a continuous partner is assured.

Conclusion

Taking all religious talk out of the conversation, the issue of “gay” marriage is not about any social civil liberty that is being denied. It is about money. The points that are being made by the “gay” lobby is not supported by any DATA available today, in fact all DATA points against the very issues brought up by the “gay” lobby: a high demand for “gay” marriage; massive discrimination; a high demand for same-sex child rearing. At less than 2% in most instances, there is no high demand for the issue.

What the DATA does show is that:

  • only 3% of the population is “gay”
  • 42% of the “gay” population do not have a relationship that lasts longer than 3 years
  • 85% of the “gay” population do not have relationships that last more than 10 years
  • a staggering 96% of all “gay” relationships are not monogamous
  • of those that have a “gay” relationship, only 22% even live together
  • of those living together in a “gay” relationship, less than 1% actually live with children
  • the above statistic is misleading because only 8% of the 22% actually have children living with them, so saying less than 1% of “gay” households live with children actually saying less than 1% of 1% of the gay population –  66,225 out of 4,040,000.
One could easily say, there is no proof of a demand for “gay” marriage; no proof of a demand for “gay” parenting; and no proof of a  demand for less discrimination against “gay” couples.

Once again, this seems like a very small group of individuals are making a money grab and putting it in a very emotional issue. This is a simple repeat of what we now all see happening on wall street, congress and in the banking industry. Make the people emotional. Divide them on a moral ground. Pass legislation. Steal profits from the U.S. tax payer.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

CPAC Staw Poll Organizers Trying to "Fix" Their Poll

CPAC Staw Poll Organizers Trying to “Fix” Their Poll

WASHINGTON [ contributed by Ron Ward, fixed by Shakaama ]– The organizers of a major conservative conference here over the next three days are trying to rig participation in a straw poll, a not-too-subtle attempt to give a Republican presidential candidate other than Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) a chance to win.

For the past two years, Paul has won, by large margins, a straw poll of attendees at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). The results have been something of an embarrassment for CPAC, organized by the American Conservative Union, which comes from a neo-conservative point of view rather than Paul’s libertarian-tinged true conservative republican view.

This year, the American Conservative Union and CPAC are moving from independently verifiable, paper ballots to electronic voting, which has been rife with voter fraud, that will be accessible from a computer or a handheld device, said Al Cardenas, the ACU’s current president. He said that he hopes this will increase the number of attendees who participate in the straw poll.

“Obviously, in the past, it’s been somewhat compromised because only a third of the people who attend voted,” Cardenas said in an interview. “It used to be a fairly cumbersome process because you had to do it manually. Now, for the first time this year we’re instituting an electronic vote.

“So people can vote through Saturday afternoon, and before, that wasn’t the case,” he said. “And we’re hoping that instead of having a third of those in attendance vote, we’ll have two-thirds or more vote.”

Ron Paul Has Won CPAC for Two Straight Years

More than 10,000 people are expected to attend, Cardenas said. He said that he wasn’t “worried” that Paul would win the straw poll for a third year in a row.

“Curious is more like it,” Cardenas said. “In the past, to his credit, about 80, 90, 100 percent of people who were there and liked Ron Paul voted, and probably a very small percentage of those who liked others bothered to vote.”

And this year, the straw poll result will have more weight than in most years past, because it comes at a unique moment in the Republican primary. The race is in flux after former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) swept three contests on Tuesday, caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado and a non-binding primary in Missouri that had no impact on winning delegates that help a candidate win the nomination, but nonetheless signal grassroots opposition to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

The primary contest has swung back and forth between Santorum, Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). All three will be at the conference on Friday to give speeches. And together, the speeches and the straw poll results on Saturday afternoon will resonate with voters and the media looking to see whether Santorum is continuing to develop an organic momentum among grassroots conservatives.

The impact could be all there is to talk about for several days, since besides Maine Republican caucus results that will be announced Saturday night, there are no more primary contests until Feb. 28, when Arizona and Michigan hold primaries.

Paul himself will not attend CPAC. He will campaign in Maine on Saturday. His son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) will speak at the conference on Thursday afternoon.

For those worried that Paul’s campaign will be organizing to get supporters to come to CPAC and vote in the straw poll, Paul’s campaign manager, Jesse Benton, said there is no such effort underway.

“We’re not participating in this year’s event,” Benton told HuffPost. He said he wasn’t sure if Paul’s name would be on the ballot. “We haven’t paid attention.”

[Ron Ward Huffington Post – Edited “fixed” by Shakaama]

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

Ron Paul Winning

Ron Paul Winning

For those not paying attention…

Apparently Ron Paul is actually winning the delegates in these caucuses. The media is not reporting this, in hopes that the pressure they put on him will dry up his support. However, unlike the two alleged front runners, Romney [ the Democrat that pretends he’s a Republican ] and Gingrich, Ron Paul support believe in their candidate’s cause. Ron Paul supporters believe that the cause Ron Paul is running for is much larger than just and election. That being said, media bias against Dr. Paul will not drive away his supporters. It has been shown that the more the media downplays Congressman Paul or tries to ignore him, the more organized and efficient his support gets.

Congressman Ron Paul

With four years to really hone their skills and learn from the miraculous dark horse that was the Obama campaign, the Ron Paul campaign is taking a page right out of the socialist turned Democrat’s rule book, GET DELEGATES. While Senator Hillary was scrambling for media attention and general support, Senator Obama was gaining delegates. When convention time rolled around, he had swept the delegates. He used this same strategy to win the presidency as well, as did Bush.

The Paul camp has learned this and is implementing it post haste. The rule book has changed and popular support is no longer the thinking man’s method to gain the presidency. While dim witted voters are left to flounder at media attention of candidates that are not going to win the election, people like Bush, Obama and now Paul are winning elections. However, because the media couches the subject in terms the general public cannot understand on any intellectual level, it comes out looking “underhanded”.

We are constantly taught that ours is a democratically run country. However, with two seconds of research, one immediately finds that we are not in any way shape, form nor fashion, democratic. Ours is a representative rule. Even are elections are done by representatives. The ultimate voters are delegates and the electoral college. Those are the people that elect candidates and ultimately the president.

Bush did not win the popular vote, everyone knows that. However, he did win the electoral college. And, that is all, in the end, that even matters, as far as the presidency is concerned.

Paul is trying to win this, not come out as Mr. Popularity. It is obvious, with the media blackout that he cannot win that coveted title. So, he’ll have to just settle for winning the presidency instead.

Ron Paul supporters seem to understand all of this and participate nearly 100%, unlike the other candidate supporters. They believe in his cause and actually show up to the caucuses and vote in all the primaries. All the polls be damned, it is the people that show up that put buts in seat that count.

Ron Paul Running for President of the U.S.

As the only Republican that is not a Neo-Con [ global government, social engineering, financial engineering, fiscal engineering and crony capitalism ] and as the only real conservative out of the entire bunch that still believes in small government, free markets and real civil rights, Ron Paul stands as the last real Republican and not a RINO [ republican in name only ].

The neo-conservative movement [ where liberals switched to the Republican party ] has dwarfed the entire Republican, conservative party, to the point you cannot identify any republican left. For Gingrich and Romney, both neo-cons, to be presented as the Republican front runners,  it speaks volume about the complete disarray of the party.

The media bias against Dr. Paul also speaks volumes. The media is generally known to be leftist leaning, including Fox News. As such, they would only accept neo-cons as their enemy of choice.

When speaking of “there is not difference between republicans and democrats”, it should be understood to mean, “there is no difference between neo-cons and democrats. And, there is no difference. All the neo-cons, which have a 60 year history now, are in fact democrats. They simply name themselves republicans.

So while the nation is focused on neo-cons that get media adoration, Dr. Paul, an actual Libertarian Republican is reviled as some hated enemy, which all Republicans should be, i.e. Libertarian Republicans.

For the media to laud neo-con republicans, is simply an exercise in self-ejaculatory back patting.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

Unemployment Rate Drop Faked

Unemployment Rate Drop Faked

As more people drop off of unemployment benefits, after 3 years of collecting unemployment, the already fake unemployment rate drops, almost like a rock.

Understand, there are no new jobs and the millions that were lost are not coming back. If you liberals / RINOs cannot understand this, I don’t know what else to say to you.

Deer in Headlights

The government tracks who is ON unemployment. Once your unemployment payments stop, and you cannot receive any more, you fall off the government’s unemployment list. So yes, in 2009 millions lost their jobs, after 3 years of collecting unemployment they used up all their payments and cannot get any more. There was not people being hired by the millions all of a sudden. It would take millions upon millions of people getting a job for the unemployment rate to drop so drastically. However, the real explanation of millions using up their unemployment explains the drop.

“The U.S. economy created jobs at the fastest pace in nine months in January, and the unemployment rate unexpectedly dropped to 8.3 percent, its lowest level in three years, since just after Obama took office.

 The report meant that unemployment has dropped every month since August, when it was 9.1 percent.” – Reuters

The good folks at ZeroHedge [some schmo that goes by the name of Tyler Durden *sigh*][ no i’m not a fan Tyler ] explained it best, so as not to confuse the idiot public.

“A month ago, we joked when we said that for Obama to get the unemployment rate to negative by election time, all he has to do is to crush the labor force participation rate to about 55%. Looks like the good folks at the BLS heard us: it appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that’s not a typo: 1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation. As for the quality of jobs, as withholding taxes roll over Year over year, it can only mean that the US is replacing high paying FIRE jobs with low paying construction and manufacturing. So much for the improvement.

This is the largest absolute jump in ‘Persons Not In Labor Force’ on record... and biggest percentage jump in 30 years.”

Floyd Norris of The New York Times says:

“How many jobs did the American economy add in January?

The Labor Department estimated on Friday that the economy gained 243,000 jobs.

The department also estimated that the economy lost 2,689,000 jobs in the month.

The difference in the two numbers is in seasonal adjustment. Employment always falls in January, as temporary Christmas jobs end. So the government applies seasonal adjustment factors in an effort to discern the real trend of the economy apart from seasonal fluctuations. The actual survey showed the big loss in jobs. The seasonal adjustments produced the reported gain of 243,000 jobs.

A reason to doubt the number is that there has been a tendency in this cycle for the seasonal factors to overstate moves, in both directions. Labor mobility is down, as fewer workers quit to seek better jobs and employers both hire and fire fewer people than they used to do. If the seasonal adjustment was too large, then the gain should be smaller.”

And for a real kick in the nuts, we have Numerian over at The Economic Populist reporting:

First, ever since the credit crisis of 2008, there has been a trend in the unemployment report that shows a declining participation rate in the job market. While a whopping number of jobs were created in January, a far larger number of people left the labor force – 1,752,000 in fact. The percent of the total working population who did not have jobs rose to 36.7%, an all time high. It’s no wonder the unemployment rate fell, when the denominator shrinks so markedly. The total number of people employed fell by 737,000. So what do you want to celebrate – the 243,000 who got jobs, or the million or so people who dropped by the wayside and are no longer counted in the data?

To put it bluntly, Obama is not your savior and there was no job creation that rocked 2 million strong in the month of January. People are not working, so much, that their not working dropped them off the list, to the tune of 1.2 million people gone off list. If you account for those people, unemployment is going strong at 10.9%. The numbers reported are faked.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

Unemployment Rate Drop Faked

Unemployment Rate Drop Faked

As more people drop off of unemployment benefits, after 3 years of collecting unemployment, the already fake unemployment rate drops, almost like a rock.

Understand, there are no new jobs and the millions that were lost are not coming back. If you liberals / RINOs cannot understand this, I don’t know what else to say to you.

Deer in Headlights

The government tracks who is ON unemployment. Once your unemployment payments stop, and you cannot receive any more, you fall off the government’s unemployment list. So yes, in 2009 millions lost their jobs, after 3 years of collecting unemployment they used up all their payments and cannot get any more. There was not people being hired by the millions all of a sudden. It would take millions upon millions of people getting a job for the unemployment rate to drop so drastically. However, the real explanation of millions using up their unemployment explains the drop.

“The U.S. economy created jobs at the fastest pace in nine months in January, and the unemployment rate unexpectedly dropped to 8.3 percent, its lowest level in three years, since just after Obama took office.

 The report meant that unemployment has dropped every month since August, when it was 9.1 percent.” – Reuters

The good folks at ZeroHedge [some schmo that goes by the name of Tyler Durden *sigh*][ no i’m not a fan Tyler ] explained it best, so as not to confuse the idiot public.

“A month ago, we joked when we said that for Obama to get the unemployment rate to negative by election time, all he has to do is to crush the labor force participation rate to about 55%. Looks like the good folks at the BLS heard us: it appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that’s not a typo: 1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation. As for the quality of jobs, as withholding taxes roll over Year over year, it can only mean that the US is replacing high paying FIRE jobs with low paying construction and manufacturing. So much for the improvement.

This is the largest absolute jump in ‘Persons Not In Labor Force’ on record... and biggest percentage jump in 30 years.”

Floyd Norris of The New York Times says:

“How many jobs did the American economy add in January?

The Labor Department estimated on Friday that the economy gained 243,000 jobs.

The department also estimated that the economy lost 2,689,000 jobs in the month.

The difference in the two numbers is in seasonal adjustment. Employment always falls in January, as temporary Christmas jobs end. So the government applies seasonal adjustment factors in an effort to discern the real trend of the economy apart from seasonal fluctuations. The actual survey showed the big loss in jobs. The seasonal adjustments produced the reported gain of 243,000 jobs.

A reason to doubt the number is that there has been a tendency in this cycle for the seasonal factors to overstate moves, in both directions. Labor mobility is down, as fewer workers quit to seek better jobs and employers both hire and fire fewer people than they used to do. If the seasonal adjustment was too large, then the gain should be smaller.”

And for a real kick in the nuts, we have Numerian over at The Economic Populist reporting:

First, ever since the credit crisis of 2008, there has been a trend in the unemployment report that shows a declining participation rate in the job market. While a whopping number of jobs were created in January, a far larger number of people left the labor force – 1,752,000 in fact. The percent of the total working population who did not have jobs rose to 36.7%, an all time high. It’s no wonder the unemployment rate fell, when the denominator shrinks so markedly. The total number of people employed fell by 737,000. So what do you want to celebrate – the 243,000 who got jobs, or the million or so people who dropped by the wayside and are no longer counted in the data?

To put it bluntly, Obama is not your savior and there was no job creation that rocked 2 million strong in the month of January. People are not working, so much, that their not working dropped them off the list, to the tune of 1.2 million people gone off list. If you account for those people, unemployment is going strong at 10.9%. The numbers reported are faked.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl