While this is true, the taxes the people will be spending g legalizing sesames couples will eventually come back and help the state or country echo inimically (Marcello et al. 35). A decade long study by M. V. Lee Budget and other con mists concluded that planning marriages would make at least $1. Billion dollars be cause Of all the necessities Of a wedding ceremony (Budget 3). Legalizing same sexagenarian should not be about believing what people think it is morally wrong or right, but factually based on the better of the economy and for the country as a whole. At UCLA School of Law, researchers studied the economics of those 1 1 states where sesames marriage is prohibited (Cockish 1). The results were shocking and as w that the states would make more than $464 million in their first year of legalizing sesames m arises (Cockish 1).
Based off of real life situations, New Work’s Marriage Equality Act brought $ 259 million to the city after only a year (Covert 3). Given these reasons, the South Carolina S prime Court should legalize sesames marriage because it would bring financial gain to fed real and state governments, allow sesames couples to receive the same insurance benefits as heterosexual couples, and make it easier for sesames couples to adopt, providing stable ho mess for children who would otherwise be left in foster care.
Economic stability is the key to a successful and generally satisfied nation. Du ring hard times, governments need all the money they can get to steady the economy a ND provide better living conditions for the less fortunate. The government is turning a blind eye to the problems masses couples are currently facing just to make more money. For example, the U. S. Government was sued by Edie Windsor when her wife passed away because o f the expenses she had to pay, which was about $363,000 in federal estate taxes (Budget 2).
The govern meet wow Id have collected less federal estate tax revenue if their marriage was official UN deer the federal law. (Budget 2). In reality though, the government can accrue more money from various taxes if they acknowledge sesames couples and marriages. Logically thinking, not all same sex couples would be a perfect match for each other like any other couple, so divorce wow
Id probably end up increase tax revenues when the marriage penalty is collected by the federal I income tax system (Budget 1 In the same study done by Budget, he predicted that legalizing GA y marriages could further bring money to the state and the federal government because a lot go sees into planning a wedding ceremony. Fifth couples were to be officially wed, thousands of coo peel would not hesitate to plan a wedding with the minimum flowers, food, and entertainment NT. As stated earlier, the purchases would at least bring in $1. Billion and without a question in do but, it would make lions in sales tax revenue for both state and local governments (Budget 1). The Congressional Budget Office (COB) held a meeting in 2004 that analyzed the o outcomes of what would be if the federal government declared sesames marriages legitimate (C overt 2). They looked at the benefits of marriages, especially the big ones like Social Security and federal taxes. The COB discovered that an extra $10 billion in the budget would exist for the next ten years if the federal government recognized and legalized sesames marriages in all sat test.
They also predicted that tax revenues would increase from $500 million to $700 million early from 2011 to 2014 (Covert 2). It is not only the country that would see these results, but also the states. Maine conducted a study on marriage equality in 2009 and in that study they discovered that if states allowed the marriages of sesames couples, the state could increase the IR budget by $7. 9 million a year (Covert 23). Once a couple is married, they will receive all the insurance benefits of being married as it states in the introduction.
This rule does not quite reach the homosexual co pulps, which can cause complications for the couple: The federal Defense of Marriage Act denies members of married same gender households access and benefits equivalent to those available to households headed by married parents or different genders, such as (1 ) Social Security and related programs, (2) housing and of odd stamps, (3) federal civilian and military service benefits, (4) employment benefits, (5) Mimi grating and nationality status, (6) remedies and protections for crimes and family violence , and (7) certain loans and financial. Appalled et al. 827) Based on a study done by two New York Times reporters, about $500,000 will be taken from sesames couples just because they cannot get married, which keeps them fro m getting employers’ spousal health insurance along with many other drawbacks (Badge et 2). Therefore, sesames couples will remain uninsured and later when they have a complication on that needs treatment they cannot afford, it eventually ends up costing all the tax payers ( Budget 2).
Then in early 2014, a new policy was passed authorizing sesames couples that were married in the 17 states and the District of Columbia to an unbiased use of spousal coverage (A Andrews 2). This policy does not take into account where they currently reside or their current policy, like other heterosexual couples. Although this policy was a big step towards equal rights or all couples, it does not, however, apply to those in domestic partnership or civil unions (And rows 2).
Not all people agree with this policy, though. Opponents argue that some pep peel should not have their tax dollars used to support something that is against their belie ifs. On December the 17 , 2009, the COB estimated that the cost of the federal government of extending g employment the iii benefits to sesames domestic partners of certain federal imp $596 million in mandatory spending and $320 million in discretionary spender O and 2019 (Marcello, et al. 4). While it is true that Social Security and HTH yes Health
Benefits program will cost the government more, the govern- ally diminish spending by about $100 million to $200 million a year from avian money from Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid, and Medicare (Cove While this debate continues on, other real problems continue ample, the growing number of children being left without proper parents dates, 1 00,000 children are waiting to be adopted while over 500,000 children are system (Afar, Foretells and Patterson 164). Currently, some States in the Unit t allow adoptions by sesames couples at all by banning the sesames couples or ride couples from adopting altogether (Afar 165).
Prohibiting perfectly capable c opting children simply increases the amount of children left without proper gal. ongoing nag debate argues that children should be raised by both a mom and a De deer of sesames couples are probably more prone to problems concerning phi teen, peer relationships, and identification of themselves (Afar 165). This tenement because there are a lot of studies done backing it up, but other studies strive or neutral effects of sesames parents on the children were recently con 10 study done at the Williams Institute at UCLA found that children of gay father adjusted as those adopted by heterosexual parents” (Afar 175).
Studies cool hillier adopted early in life by lesbian, gay, and heterosexual parents appeared to be thriving. ” The study also found that the children were properly developing their own genders stating t hat it did not matter if the parents were gay, lesbian, or heterosexual, boys showcased typical bee favors of other boys in that age. In these studies, mostly wildcatted and financially successful FAA miles were use for of the research proving that if those parents have a stable lifestyle and are able to provide and care for the children properly, the problems that are frequently mentioned w loud not be as big of n issue (Afar 165).
As these studies show, adoptions should solely be based on the how well the parents can devote their lives into raising a child. The future of a child is strongly reflective of the parent and the role they played d in the child’s life. They need the basic needs of love from a healthy and stable house hold with reasonable adults in order for the children to reach their full potential as an a dull (Appalled et al. 827).
As stated by the American Academy of Pediatrics (PAP)’ children’s well Ewing IS affected much more by their relationships with their parents, their parents’ SE nose of competence ND security, and the presences of social and economic support for the family than by the gender or the sexual orientation of their parents”‘ (Appalled et al. 827). It was discover deed that 646,464 households had sesames parents and they are raising about 1 1 5,000 children around or below the age of 18 through the 2010 US Census (Gartered 34).
Children brought up n those types of households are practically spread out throughout the whole United States wit h children being raised by single homosexual parents. If put together there are about 2 million children being brought up by a gay or lesbian parent. The numbers will probably continue to row in the future, but some people are still for the ideal family properly bringing up a child (Agar reel 34). It is logical to think that children being brought up in a stable, normal house would d be the safest for the children.
However, 50% of heterosexual couples in their first marriage will likely end up in a divorce in about seven to eight years (Gartered 34). With these divorces, 65% of mothers will gain physical and legal custody of their children, while the fathers do not get c custody whatsoever. This means that out of those 50% who has a child, the child will n tot live in the ideal family that so many people push for (Gartered 34). A contain nuking study conducted by the US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (NULLS) found results that actually showed better outcomes for adolescents b Ewing raised by sesames couples (Gartered 30, 32).
For example, one of the analyses conclude d that “1 rear old UNLESS girls and boys were rated significantly higher in social, school/ academic and total competence and significantly lower in social, relearning, aggressive, and ext reanalyzing problem behavior than the comparisons group” (Gartered 32). They also shows d higher levels in many other aspects of life like social skills, school/ academic, and “total competence than gender attached normative samples of American teenagers” (Gartered 33). This might be the case due to the commitments the NULLS mothers made even before their child was born and after the child was born (Gartered 3334).
Once the child was born, the mothers keenly took a part of the child’s education and stay connected to them no matter what (Gartered 34). In conclusion, sesames marriage overall has a positive effect economically. As messes marriage being legalized by the South Carolina legislator would bring financial success to both federal and state government, make life safer and easier for sesames couples cause they could take advantage of insurance benefits, and lastly the adoption process would b e so much easier for sesames couples which would result in fewer children without proper parents .
The main disagreement is that the people who do not believe and do not support same sex couples should not have their taxes going towards providing a safe and equal life for those as messes couples. Cooking at the studies and the statistics, in the long run the government would d be making more money through tax revenues, sale revenues, and other taxes collected from married couples by the government. Then government would use that money for the better of the e country or the state.