A study issued this week by UCLA’s Williams Institute for Sexual Orientation and the Law projected that gay men and lesbians will spend $684 million on cakes, photographers and other services over the next three years unless voters reverse the high court’s ruling in the fall.
The researchers found that about half of the state’s more than 100,000 same-sex couples will get married during the next three years, and an additional 68,000 out-of-state couples will travel to California to exchange vows. The study estimated that over that period, gay weddings will generate $64 million in tax revenue for the state, $9 million in marriage-license fees for counties, and some 2,200 jobs.
You know, if I were in California and a proponent of same-sex marriages, these are figures that I would be putting into the ads against the anti-same-sex marriage proposition that’s going to be on the ballot this fall. And I would ask: why do those against same-sex marriage want to interfere with the livelihoods of thousands of decent, hard-working Californians and deprive them of millions of dollars of potential income? Why do they want to take the food out of the mouths of California families? Why do they make it harder for these folks to keep a roof over their heads, or pay their medical bills, or put their kids through college? Why do they want to deprive thousands of Californians jobs they could use, and that the state needs? $684 million’s not exactly chump change, particularly in a weak economy.
So, it’s not just a social issue involving gays and lesbians, it’s an economic issue involving the entire state — and those against same-sex marriage are essentially saying their discomfort with two people of the same sex exercising a right the California Supreme Court says they have is a good enough excuse to deprive other Californians not only of their rights, but of their money, too. And depriving hard-working citizens of their money, well. That’s un-American. What are these guys, commies? Probably. Probably, indeed.
In short: Same-sex marriage: Good for business, good for the economy, good for California. That’s how I would sell it.