Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Lawyers for Kentucky argue that same-sex marriages will wreck the state's economic future. That's the joke   (usatoday.com ) divider line 54
    More: Dumbass, Kentucky, opponents of same-sex marriage, rational basis, Steve Beshear, birth rates, Southern Indiana, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit  
•       •       •

3084 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 May 2014 at 9:52 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2014-05-13 09:59:32 AM  
9 votes:
I suppose that the state of Kentucky will now require proof of fertility from both parties before issuing marriage licenses now.

If procreation is the whole argument, Polygamy should also be immediately legalized. A woman can only give birth every nine or so months, but men...they can shoot sperm practically all day every day, right?
2014-05-13 10:00:49 AM  
7 votes:
In the 32-page appeal, attorney Leigh Gross Latherow says Kentucky has an interest in maintaining birth rates, which if allowed to fall can induce economic crises because of the reduced demand for good and services, and the reduction of the work force.
Latherow explained in the appeal how allowing gays to marry would reduce the birth rate among heterosexual couples, stating that many married couples in Kentucky, particularly conservative Republicans, are actually closeted homosexuals who have been trapped in resentful, unloving relationships.  Latherow cited the popular term "beard", and noted that many homosexuals have children, for example, as a result of dutiful eyes-closed sex while fantasizing about their real preferred partner.  Allowing gay marriage, the appeal concludes, would mean that these bitter and spiteful, yet fruitful faux-heterosexual relationships would not exist, with a resulting reduction in birth rates.
2014-05-13 12:41:47 PM  
6 votes:

Nix Nightbird: While I understand and approve of removing gender discrimination from marriage contracts across the nation, I also don't understand why gay people would choose to live in a state that hates them so much.

So why wouldn't a gay couple just pack up, move to Massachussettes or somewhere welcoming, and leave the podunk assholes in Kentucky behind? There's no geography or landscape worth putting up with awful people.


Hey, everyone, Nix has volunteered to pay moving expenses for anyone who wants to leave their state because of discrimination! Thanks, Nix, you're the best. Will you be paying with an oversized novelty check?

Many people don't have the liquid cash to pack up their entire lives and move to a different state, search for a new job, etc. This particularly applies to people who are the victims of discrimination. For example, in Kentucky, you can be fired or refused a job because you're gay. That might make it tough to scrape up the cash to leave those podunk assholes.
2014-05-13 10:12:55 AM  
6 votes:
"The institution of the man-woman marriage is deeply rooted in the history and traditions of our country," the appeal says. "A right to same-sex marriage is not."

So was slavery.  We got over ending that, I think we can get over letting two dudes exchange vows.
"We ain't a never done it that way before" is just about the stupidest farking reason you can come up with to outlaw something.
2014-05-13 10:09:18 AM  
6 votes:
Steve also doesn't seem to grasp that the state's population isn't decreasing due to a lowered birth-rate so much as it is because people are moving away.

If Kentucky were more of a progressive state (by recognizing and allowing gay marriage) then maybe so many of the young college grads and professionals wouldn't leave.

This argument of his is so stupid that even his own Attorney-General (who is a political beast and glad-handing sack of shiat of the highest order) won't touch it.
2014-05-13 10:12:12 AM  
5 votes:
When you have no actual arguments beyond "my religion doesn't approve of the gheys" then you grasp for straws.  When you grasp for straws, you look like a dipshiat.  When you look like a dipshiat, you end up on the wrong side of history.

Don't end up on the wrong side of history.
2014-05-13 10:00:49 AM  
5 votes:
I am certain that the lawyers for the state will be able to justify their argument by referencing data from other states showing a consistent pattern of a decline in birth rates following legal recognition of same-sex marriage. If the argument is not completely dishonest, then ample supporting evidence should be readily available.
2014-05-13 09:57:50 AM  
5 votes:
The councils fighting gay marriage equality have only one argument, "we've got nothing so we'll just make shiat up."
2014-05-13 09:29:28 AM  
5 votes:
Wait until they find out how much gay people spend.
2014-05-13 02:38:04 PM  
4 votes:

Nix Nightbird: While I understand and approve of removing gender discrimination from marriage contracts across the nation, I also don't understand why gay people would choose to live in a state that hates them so much.

Example: I am, at best, described as an agnostic witch, if I'm anything at all in regards to religion. Either way, I don't buy into the Judeo-Christian stories one bit, and find most people involved in those religions to be mentally-stunted, judgmental jerks about 92.577% of the time. Ergo, I don't live in Kansas.

I also don't like large crowds, so I don't live in New York City.

I also don't like dying or losing all my stuff in a tornado, therefore I opted not to live in Oklahoma.

I used to live in the Detroit area. At one point, while working I had a gun shoved in my face. I decided I would like to avoid having another gun pointed at me, so I MOVED THE FARK OUT OF DETROIT... And since then, the gun-in-my-face problem has gone away.

So why wouldn't a gay couple just pack up, move to Massachussettes or somewhere welcoming, and leave the podunk assholes in Kentucky behind? There's no geography or landscape worth putting up with awful people.


Moving takes money. A lot of people in these backwoods states, like ky and in (where I am) don't have the money to move. A lot of the time, they have jobs that pay so little money, moving is just a dream that will never get realized. That's why spreading marriage equality is so important... not everyone can move. Why should I move away from my family and loved ones to make bible beating devil dodgers happy?
2014-05-13 10:24:25 AM  
4 votes:

If we allow people to become doctors, we'll all starve, because there'll be no farmers.

Therefore, ban doctors.

2014-05-13 09:02:10 AM  
4 votes:
 Beshear's hired counsel say Kentucky has a legitimate interest in encouraging procreation to support "long-term economic stability through stable birth rates."

Yeah, if I weren't allowed to gay marry my husband in Minnesota, I'd totally be gettin' Brandine pregnant instead as THAT'S HOW SEXUALITY WORKS. Dumbass.
2014-05-13 01:24:40 PM  
3 votes:
This, and some of the other briefs filed in favor of same-sex marriage bans, show how incoherent and stupid the argument against gay marriage is when you aren't allowed to use "But Jesus" as your argument.
2014-05-13 11:57:31 AM  
3 votes:
Aren't these lawyers totally embarrassed when they stand up and make such painfully bad arguments in front of a judge?

I mean, forget which side of the issue you're on, the logic they use is just piss poor.
2014-05-13 10:47:34 AM  
3 votes:
The funny part to me is that if they'd just look at the development of nearly any neighborhood in a large city after the gays move in, the property values tend to rise, not fall, and economic activity tends to increase, not decrease.

Gay people are more likely to have income to spend BECAUSE they don't have kids. They can end up with MORE disposable income that they spend on consumer goods, clothes, home improvement, fancy furniture, restaurants, etc.

If they really wanted to ensure economic prosperity, make a place that gay people would WANT to go to, and they will come and spend money. And more money. They pay taxes, but don't use as many of the services because they don't have the kids, making it a profit for the government, not a loss.

Kentucky, just admit you think gays are icky. At least that's your truthful position. When you try to instead use easily refuted "statistics" it makes your case look worse.
2014-05-13 10:26:01 AM  
3 votes:
What wrecks the State's economic future is its inability to move forward with vital infrastructure and other necessary projects to make the State more attractive to business.  It's taken them more than 30 years to finally get some needed bridges built that will bring the logistics value of the State up to close to the modern era.  Education is still considered to be lacking in many respects, small counties/towns are frequently at war with the major "Golden Triangle" players in the State.  We keep raping the earth to scavenge as much of its fossilized fuels as can be extracted, then when we have a mess of stuff, it frequently ends up getting dumped into vital water ways in the State.
2014-05-13 10:19:33 AM  
3 votes:

ampoliros: The wife and I were married in KY but we live in another state and had a kid. I have a brother who married in KY, had a kid and adopted another from out of state. My other brother is still in KY and doesn't have any kids. Clearly the marriage of gays is the cause for all of this.



My wife and I don't have any kids. It must be because of the gays and not the hysterectomy she had a few years before we got married.
2014-05-13 09:59:50 AM  
3 votes:
This procreation argument is so full of crap. There are many marriages that cannot procreate for multiple reasons. If children are going to be a requirement of marriage Newt Gingrich's marriages are not null and void.
2014-05-13 09:56:55 AM  
3 votes:
Once married Kentucky couples will have 18 months to conceive. If no offspring is produced the couples will be fined $2000.00 and given a state issued baby.
2014-05-13 04:32:17 PM  
2 votes:

Nix Nightbird: While I understand and approve of removing gender discrimination from marriage contracts across the nation, I also don't understand why gay people would choose to live in a state that hates them so much.

Example: I am, at best, described as an agnostic witch, if I'm anything at all in regards to religion. Either way, I don't buy into the Judeo-Christian stories one bit, and find most people involved in those religions to be mentally-stunted, judgmental jerks about 92.577% of the time. Ergo, I don't live in Kansas.

I also don't like large crowds, so I don't live in New York City.

I also don't like dying or losing all my stuff in a tornado, therefore I opted not to live in Oklahoma.

I used to live in the Detroit area. At one point, while working I had a gun shoved in my face. I decided I would like to avoid having another gun pointed at me, so I MOVED THE FARK OUT OF DETROIT... And since then, the gun-in-my-face problem has gone away.

So why wouldn't a gay couple just pack up, move to Massachussettes or somewhere welcoming, and leave the podunk assholes in Kentucky behind? There's no geography or landscape worth putting up with awful people.


There are numerous reasons to live somewhere. Job and family/friends probably being the two biggest.

Hell, a lot of the gay people probably livein areas that are supportive.

Plus the very idea that you are moving purely because the government has denied you your rights is an issue in and of itself.
2014-05-13 10:46:57 AM  
2 votes:

Arkanaut: kbronsito: If marriage is supposed to be our means to encourage reproduction, then why do we have a child tax credit? It seems to me that having two programs to encourage children duplicates efforts and is a waste of tax payer money.

It's funny because as conservatives grasp at the reproduction straw to fight same-sex marriage, they'll shame poor people for supposedly having lots of kids to get welfare money.


If there's a demographic with a high fertility rate out there, it's Mexicans. And yet, the pro-birth brigade doesn't seem to welcome Mexican babies, unless the term "anchor baby" was intended to be affectionate and I wasn't notified.
2014-05-13 10:43:31 AM  
2 votes:

Rigby-Reardon: Once married Kentucky couples will have 18 months to conceive. If no offspring is produced the couples will be fined $2000.00 and given a state issued baby.


That doesn't help.  Giving a couple an already existing child doesn't increase population; it just moves the population around.  The correct solution is that the woman will be impregnanted, forcibly if necessary, to insure she makes more babies - and that she is impregnated immediately after birthing, as long as she is pre-menopausal.

img.fark.net
2014-05-13 10:16:27 AM  
2 votes:
The wife and I were married in KY but we live in another state and had a kid. I have a brother who married in KY, had a kid and adopted another from out of state. My other brother is still in KY and doesn't have any kids. Clearly the marriage of gays is the cause for all of this.
2014-05-13 10:10:46 AM  
2 votes:

Neondistraction: And how much of the state's money are they pissing away trying to defend this law?  Pretty much every state that has passed similar bans on same-sex marriage have had those laws ruled unconstitutional and overturned.  Do they really think that they're going to somehow be that  one state that manages to make it stick?


Nope, rather it's a very long-view marketing campaign. For example, as a result of  Loving v. Virginia, the state gained the slogan:
www.virginia.org
Clearly, Kentucky is hoping that their case will go to the Supreme Court for its sweeping decision on gay marriage, so that they can grab a piece of the resulting tourism:
www.freewoodpost.com
2014-05-13 10:08:07 AM  
2 votes:
How are gay couples going to stop straight couples from having babies?
2014-05-13 10:03:12 AM  
2 votes:

Arkanaut: Despite all the pearl-clutching, every state in the union except for Rhode Island and Maine had population growth between 2010 and 2013 (Source). Kentucky is a little bit behind the pack but there's no reason to panic.


Maine and Rhode Island both legally recognize same-sex marriage. The negative population growth in those states therefore proves that same-sex marriage causes a decline in birth rates. Quad Erat Derp.
2014-05-13 10:03:11 AM  
2 votes:
"She cited recent dips in the economies of Germany and Japan tied to declines in birth rates."

I know, let's cite two countries that don't have same-sex marriage.  We could throw in Russia, South Korea, Ukraine, Belarus, etc while we're at it.
2014-05-13 10:00:06 AM  
2 votes:
Despite all the pearl-clutching, every state in the union except for Rhode Island and Maine had population growth between 2010 and 2013 (Source). Kentucky is a little bit behind the pack but there's no reason to panic.
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-05-13 09:10:54 AM  
2 votes:
Because they need some of those ghey genes to improve the local gene pool?
.
2014-05-13 05:42:38 PM  
1 vote:
Because if you don't let gay people get married they'll HAVE to start having straight sex.
2014-05-13 04:28:21 PM  
1 vote:

Biological Ali: I kind of feel for the lawyers in situations like these - it's their job to go out and make these arguments, but there's no way that they (or for that matter anybody else with the benefit of at least a high school education) could actually believe them.

Must be tough, though I suppose the piles of money they get paid might make up for it.


Lawyes have every right to refuse a case. These guys chose to pursue this case. They are either true believers or greedy sacks of shiat. Maybe it sucks for some staffers and such, but the guys in front of the cameras are there purely for greed and/or stupidity.
2014-05-13 04:06:52 PM  
1 vote:
2014-05-13 03:37:20 PM  
1 vote:

Theaetetus: In the 32-page appeal, attorney Leigh Gross Latherow says Kentucky has an interest in maintaining birth rates, which if allowed to fall can induce economic crises because of the reduced demand for good and services, and the reduction of the work force.
Latherow explained in the appeal how allowing gays to marry would reduce the birth rate among heterosexual couples, stating that many married couples in Kentucky, particularly conservative Republicans, are actually closeted homosexuals who have been trapped in resentful, unloving relationships.  Latherow cited the popular term "beard", and noted that many homosexuals have children, for example, as a result of dutiful eyes-closed sex while fantasizing about their real preferred partner.  Allowing gay marriage, the appeal concludes, would mean that these bitter and spiteful, yet fruitful faux-heterosexual relationships would not exist, with a resulting reduction in birth rates.


Translation:  We want people in hate-filled sham marriages, rather than loving healthy relationships.

I lose, obviously.
2014-05-13 03:26:09 PM  
1 vote:

Biological Ali: I kind of feel for the lawyers in situations like these - it's their job to go out and make these arguments, but there's no way that they (or for that matter anybody else with the benefit of at least a high school education) could actually believe them.

Must be tough, though I suppose the piles of money they get paid might make up for it.


It's worth noting that the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Kentucky threw up his hands, so the governor hired a law firm in Ashland (not in Louisville, not in Lexington... Ashland). Your dollar goes farther where the weeds meet the water.

So the governor wants to fight the ghey, at a cost to the taxpayer. This is weirder than the logic pretzels I get from friends that want to get off the grid but have no idea how to dig a well or build a house.
2014-05-13 03:09:03 PM  
1 vote:

Neondistraction: And how much of the state's money are they pissing away trying to defend this law?  Pretty much every state that has passed similar bans on same-sex marriage have had those laws ruled unconstitutional and overturned.  Do they really think that they're going to somehow be that  one state that manages to make it stick?

And as has already been pointed out, their argument is ridiculous.  Gay people make up, on average, 10 percent of the population.  Even if those gay people would go on to have children if they weren't allowed to marry (which in itself is pants-on-head retarded) I don't think that 10% is enough to have that much of an affect on the birth rate.


Their whole argument is, if you allow gay marriage, then all the closet homosexuals wlll come out, doubling or even tripling the homosexual rate. Seriously, that's the argument they are unwittingly making ... that everyone is, in fact, a closet homosexual who will end their sham marriages in order to get gay-married.

/And a Herp to the Derp to the Herp Derp Derp...
2014-05-13 01:43:27 PM  
1 vote:

svanmeter: Darwin agrees


I like how you keep repeating this line even though it's been explained to you why it's bullshiat several times. That's dedication.
2014-05-13 01:42:08 PM  
1 vote:

Muta: The councils fighting gay marriage equality have only one argument, "we've got nothing so we'll just make shiat up."


This. The procreation line has been tried how many times now? And every single time it gets dismissed.

I always laughed when Christie's dude tried to make that argument in front of the NJ Supreme Court, and one of the REPUBLICAN justices verbally biatch smacked him about it.
2014-05-13 12:37:56 PM  
1 vote:
God forbid with only 7 billion we should do anything to slow birth rate.
2014-05-13 12:26:13 PM  
1 vote:
While I understand and approve of removing gender discrimination from marriage contracts across the nation, I also don't understand why gay people would choose to live in a state that hates them so much.

Example: I am, at best, described as an agnostic witch, if I'm anything at all in regards to religion. Either way, I don't buy into the Judeo-Christian stories one bit, and find most people involved in those religions to be mentally-stunted, judgmental jerks about 92.577% of the time. Ergo, I don't live in Kansas.

I also don't like large crowds, so I don't live in New York City.

I also don't like dying or losing all my stuff in a tornado, therefore I opted not to live in Oklahoma.

I used to live in the Detroit area. At one point, while working I had a gun shoved in my face. I decided I would like to avoid having another gun pointed at me, so I MOVED THE FARK OUT OF DETROIT... And since then, the gun-in-my-face problem has gone away.

So why wouldn't a gay couple just pack up, move to Massachussettes or somewhere welcoming, and leave the podunk assholes in Kentucky behind? There's no geography or landscape worth putting up with awful people.
2014-05-13 12:17:17 PM  
1 vote:

Shorelinefarker: So bestiality is A-OK in Kentucky, but they're shiatting their pants at the idea of two adults who happen to be of the same gender getting hitched? Seems legit.


Hey, look, if bestiality were looked down upon in Kentucky, most of the women there would die old maids.
2014-05-13 11:47:26 AM  
1 vote:
So bestiality is A-OK in Kentucky, but they're shiatting their pants at the idea of two adults who happen to be of the same gender getting hitched? Seems legit.
2014-05-13 11:10:48 AM  
1 vote:
The crap of the procreation argument is that nobody is trying to get rid of straight marriage, and procreative ability isn't even a litmus to get married... letting old people marry doesn't seem to discourage young people from having kids... so why not let gay people marry?
2014-05-13 11:04:00 AM  
1 vote:
Just when I thought their arguments couldn't possibly get any dumber...

Seriously, that is so farking ridiculous I have to wonder if the state actually wants to lose this case.
2014-05-13 11:02:58 AM  
1 vote:

Jormungandr: Arkanaut: kbronsito: If marriage is supposed to be our means to encourage reproduction, then why do we have a child tax credit? It seems to me that having two programs to encourage children duplicates efforts and is a waste of tax payer money.

It's funny because as conservatives grasp at the reproduction straw to fight same-sex marriage, they'll shame poor people for supposedly having lots of kids to get welfare money.

That's a feature of authoritarian personalities. Compartmentalized thinking. They literally do not think to reconcile the two thoughts "Damn gays dropping the birth rate" and "damn poors having kids"


Or, you know, they could just be lying about why they don't want gay marriage.
2014-05-13 10:50:21 AM  
1 vote:
Because settling down with your partner is bad for society and sets a bad example.
2014-05-13 10:46:31 AM  
1 vote:
FTA: "The institution of the man-woman marriage is deeply rooted in the history and traditions of our country," the appeal says. "A right to same-sex marriage is not."

So were a lot of "institutions": owning slaves, child labor, white-males-only voting, segregated water fountains, spousal abuse... some institutions that are "deeply rooted in the history and traditions of our country" need to change.

Why not just come clean and say "gheys r icky"?
2014-05-13 10:40:09 AM  
1 vote:
So I guess that means we should have penalties for women who don't have at least 2 babies by the time they're 35.
2014-05-13 10:29:32 AM  
1 vote:

kbronsito: If marriage is supposed to be our means to encourage reproduction, then why do we have a child tax credit? It seems to me that having two programs to encourage children duplicates efforts and is a waste of tax payer money.


It's funny because as conservatives grasp at the reproduction straw to fight same-sex marriage, they'll shame poor people for supposedly having lots of kids to get welfare money.
2014-05-13 10:19:30 AM  
1 vote:
If marriage is supposed to be our means to encourage reproduction, then why do we have a child tax credit? It seems to me that having two programs to encourage children duplicates efforts and is a waste of tax payer money.
2014-05-13 10:08:36 AM  
1 vote:
Solution: serve more whiskey at gay weddings. Kentucky's economy isn't just preserved but stronger than ever.
2014-05-13 10:07:35 AM  
1 vote:
the key word is "Lawyers".


Lawyers = Liars.
2014-05-13 10:03:48 AM  
1 vote:
And how much of the state's money are they pissing away trying to defend this law?  Pretty much every state that has passed similar bans on same-sex marriage have had those laws ruled unconstitutional and overturned.  Do they really think that they're going to somehow be that  one state that manages to make it stick?

And as has already been pointed out, their argument is ridiculous.  Gay people make up, on average, 10 percent of the population.  Even if those gay people would go on to have children if they weren't allowed to marry (which in itself is pants-on-head retarded) I don't think that 10% is enough to have that much of an affect on the birth rate.
2014-05-13 10:03:07 AM  
1 vote:
Because children aren't produced without (straight) marriage ever, and (straight) marriages always produce children.

Morons.
2014-05-13 09:55:24 AM  
1 vote:
Are they legalizing incest too? Babies is babies.
 
Displayed 54 of 54 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report