NC Marriage Amendment Good for Business

http://www.nomblog.com/13478

Groups that oppose the marriage amendment have said the amendment would discourage big corporations from locating in the state and might keep corporations from providing benefits to the partners of gay employees. Nothing could be more baseless. No study, economic or otherwise, has shown that the protection of marriage has yielded negative economic consequences to a state. The fact that 30 states have already protected marriage in their constitutions affirms it is good for business.

In fact, states that have protected marriage have better business rankings than states that have not or states that have redefined marriage to include gay couples. Eight out of the top 10 states ranked by Forbes magazine as the best states for business have a constitutional marriage amendment. North Carolina is one of two states in the top 10 that do not.

Each year, the American Legislative Exchange Council issues a report, "Rich States, Poor States," ranking the economic health of the 50 states. In 2011, all of the top 10 economically healthy states identified in the report have laws affirming that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, nine of them in their constitutions. By contrast, the 10 bottom-ranked states for economic health all undermine marriage in their laws.

This is no accident. Strong marriage laws lead to strong economies, because marriage produces future workers who are balanced, stable and healthy.

... Marriage doesn't prevent individuals from living how they want to live. It doesn't prohibit intimate relationships or curtail one's constitutional rights. But by specifically licensing marriage, the State of North Carolina attaches mothers and fathers to their children and to one another, providing the best known and documented environment for the rearing of our next generation.

This is the primary reason that government is in the marriage business and the reason marriage is worth protecting with a constitutional amendment

One commenter noted "THIS EMPOWERS YOU TO KILL SSM NOM" or something like that. Ignorance aside, this article is logically flawed. "Strong marriage lead to strong economies," based on their statistical observations. The implication that SSM weakens marriage is downright funny considering that something like divorce rate might be indicative of states that have strong marriages (I'd like to point out here that New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Iowa, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia, all areas with legalized same-sex marriage, do not appear on that list).


The argument that "30 states have protected marriage affirms it is good for business" is downright ludicrous, implying that the majority is always right. I am quite certain that the Jim Crow laws were good for business back in the day, too.

I'd like to point out that there are a whole host of variables not accounted for by the author of this article or by NOM. Things other than marriage affect economy, such as state business tax laws, or the state unemployment rate. To draw a line in the sand like that and say that equal rights hurt economies is not doing justice to the matter at hand, nor is it a logical thought process. For example, it is very easy to observe that ice cream sales increase at the beach around the same time that the number of beached whales increase. Based on that observation using NOM's and ALEC's inane logic, one would conclude that in order to prevent whales from being beached, one must stop the sale of ice cream.


On a side note, the group that made those observations, the American Legislative Exchange Commission, is heavily criticized for its behavior. The current chairman of ALEC, Noble Ellington (ironic name?) has been quoted as saying "the taxpaying public is represented...because I'm there", which seems to go in direct contrast to NOM's "Let the people vote" idea. (For those of you keeping score at home, this is now [at least] two times NOM has gone against its own ideal of letting people vote on matters).