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.

(Talking Points Memo)   Rick Santorum: gay marriage hurts the economy. Because if there's one thing we know, it's that gay men DON'T spend money   (talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 98
    More: Unlikely, Rick Santorum, injury, romantic relationship, opponents of same-sex marriage  
•       •       •

1428 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jun 2014 at 2:37 PM (5 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



98 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-20 12:12:27 PM
i'm pretty sure rick is a closeted homo.
 
2014-06-20 12:21:32 PM
"Santorum's comments follow a legal filing last month by the state of Kentucky, seeking to overturn a pro-gay marriage court ruling, in which lawyers for the state argued that the state had an "economic interest" in banning same-sex marriage"

Lolwut?  I'd love to see their "evidence" to support this.
 
2014-06-20 12:23:01 PM
Yup, just look at how all those hall rentals and caterers are just listing in Massachusetts...

Marriage equality invests folks in community. To put down roots. To buy homes, to settle down, to buy kitchy crap, to go out with their spouse, to do stuff with their spouse, to do anniversaries and the whole nine. Marriages likewise bind communities together beyond just families. Folks my age? We have families of choice. Friends who are family as far as we're concerned. Marriages bind these disparate folks together in more ways than just familial lines gathering property.

Marriages bring folks together in communities. They invest folks within those communities, and even see folks going to places of worship more often. Marriage equality is a boon, and the only folks who suffer, are the churches who don't like it, not one bit, as folks joint OTHER ministries, and put dollars in their collection plates. Oh boo farking hoo...
 
2014-06-20 12:25:43 PM
If an economic reason or argument can be used to take civil rights and constitutional protections away, what other groups is  Santorum thinking should have their rights taken away  to increase the economic output of the US?
 
2014-06-20 12:27:45 PM
Let me guess: if gays marry, straights won't marry, and there are more straights than gays, so less money will be spent on weddings. How close was I?
 
2014-06-20 12:27:49 PM
yeah, because all those gay weddings aren't putting a damn dime into the economy.
 
2014-06-20 12:34:05 PM
Even if it did, which it wouldn't, that's no excuse.
 
2014-06-20 12:48:27 PM
I'm pretty sure abolishing slavery hurt the economy more.  Sometimes the economic impact isn't the primary factor in a decision.  Sometimes doing what's right and making sure everyone has the same rights matters more.
 
2014-06-20 12:50:14 PM
His logic is so convoluted I can't even begin to understand it.

How does giving more people the right to marry reduce the number of marriages?  What straight couple in the history of ever was planning on getting married but then called it off because their gay neighbors got married?

Seriously, does he think that straight couples sit around all day thinking about what gay couples do, and get so depressed about it that they can't carry on?

In the vast pantheon of stupid social conservative statements this really has to rank up near the very top.
 
2014-06-20 12:51:12 PM
The argument is dumb, but so is the target audience.
 
2014-06-20 12:52:54 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Seriously, does he think that straight couples sit around all day thinking about what gay couples do...


When they care closeted themselves, absolutely.
 
2014-06-20 12:53:32 PM
So, let me get this straight: people who WANT to get married and settle down and contribute to their communities are going to hurt the economy by investing in their communities?

Yup. Brilliant deducerating there, Spanky...
 
2014-06-20 01:00:01 PM
Not only is he not right, he's not even wrong.
 
2014-06-20 01:06:58 PM
I work at a popular hotel run by a gay married couple. My entire economy is based on gay marriage.
 
2014-06-20 01:08:02 PM
Again, this man had a shot at the RNC nomination. The election cost 6 billion dollars.

Don't laugh. He could have been next.
 
2014-06-20 01:12:07 PM
He's right.

When New York legalized it, it hurt Connecticut and Massachusetts since gay New Yoker couples didn't have to go to those states for ceremonies and planners, caterers, florists, etc.

Checkmate Libtards
 
2014-06-20 01:13:29 PM

Ambivalence: TuteTibiImperes: Seriously, does he think that straight couples sit around all day thinking about what gay couples do...

When they care closeted themselves, absolutely.


Aaaaaand, we're done.
 
2014-06-20 01:14:33 PM

TuteTibiImperes: His logic is so convoluted I can't even begin to understand it.

How does giving more people the right to marry reduce the number of marriages?  What straight couple in the history of ever was planning on getting married but then called it off because their gay neighbors got married?

Seriously, does he think that straight couples sit around all day thinking about what gay couples do, and get so depressed about it that they can't carry on?

In the vast pantheon of stupid social conservative statements this really has to rank up near the very top.


Apparently, he thinks that people will just get straight married if they can't get gay married. Because if you're not attracted to the opposite sex, then it totally makes sense to get married to someone you aren't attracted to, and raise up children with that partner, because that's totally healthy...

And that's the thing isn't it? These are folks who think that marriage is such a precious commodity that some folks aren't worth the institution. That it will somehow suffer if some folks get married, and that their own marriages will become diminished by homosexuals being with people that they love, the same way that their own marriages were diminished by Brittney Spears' 55 hour quickie marriage.

It's an odd way of thinking. That love and marriage are commodities that can be valued or devalued by others'. It is a way of looking at the world, in terms of "What's in it for me!" even if it has nothing to do with them, their church, or their community. And that's what it boils down to. And it's one of the reasons that I despise this sort of Nosy Nellie, because it's all about getting up in someone else's business to see if they're getting a piece of cake that was better than their own. Never mind that they got their own cake, that they liked their cake, that they were giddy at the time they got their cake, they are certain that IF someone else can have cake too, that their own cake will somehow curdle in their stomach, because...Jesus?

Happiness isn't a precious commodity to be hoarded. There IS perhaps too damn little of it in the world today, but that just means we have to promote it more, and share it more often. And that's the thing: the more we share that happiness, the more there is to return. And these folks don't understand the concept, because they're lost in games of one-upsmanship and looking at the world as a competition. Hottest wife, wins! Best car wins!  Kids with the most awards wins! Never mind that others are happy with their wives, with their laughs, their jokes, their own freaky-deaky in the bedroom that only friends suspect. Never mind that the car someone drives makes them happy, maybe because of reasons that go beyond the value of the car, but memories of taking drives with your folks, and the big ass New Yorker makes you think of Grandpa. Never mind that your kid doesn't compete in all sorts of contests, but is happy, healthy, and you spend a lot of the time that they could be gearing up for endless awards and competitions, they're with you biking, fishing, and out on the water. If it's not THEIR way of looking at things, then it can't have any value. It's a odd and selfish sort of existence. OTHER people are happy with things I don't enjoy? Value things I DON'T value? How can that be? And what gnaws at them, and this is the crux of the matter, is that if they see someone enjoying something that they don't, then they wonder, "Have I been wrong all this time? If I have been, and THAT stuff is better than MY stuff, then I'd best squash their happiness or mine doesn't matter." That's the pettiness of their existence. And infuriating as it can be, it's also so damn tragic and sad that you have to sort of feel sorry for their small little hearts too...
 
2014-06-20 01:37:49 PM
"When we continue to see a decline in marriage and a redefinition of marriage, you get less marriage," he said.

So, by increasing the number of people who CAN marry, you reduce the number of marriage?

Impeccable reasoning, Rick.  Truly brilliant.
 
2014-06-20 01:40:07 PM

TuteTibiImperes: How does giving more people the right to marry reduce the number of marriages?


Because the only reason to get married is to lord it over the people that can't, clearly. If marriage was just something any two people could do, what's the point? It's like a country club, if everyone can be a member then there's no reason to have a club in the first place.

Oh, he's right about one thing, married people do tend to spend more than unmarried people. The problem is that includes gays, too:

content.gallup.com

So to help the economy we should force everyone to get either married or gay married, right, Rick?
 
2014-06-20 01:44:46 PM
Santorums comments from yesterday's march in dc were downright strange. He was saying that god sees marrage as an economic venture designed to produce children and that's all there is to it. Love wasn't part of the deal...produce kids or don't get married.
 
2014-06-20 01:47:47 PM

Weaver95: Santorums comments from yesterday's march in dc were downright strange. He was saying that god sees marrage as an economic venture designed to produce children and that's all there is to it. Love wasn't part of the deal...produce kids or don't get married.


And yet they never claim that the aged and barren shouldn't be allowed to marry. It's almost like their stated reason for objection is not genuine.
 
2014-06-20 01:49:38 PM

Weaver95: Santorums comments from yesterday's march in dc were downright strange. He was saying that god sees marrage as an economic venture designed to produce children and that's all there is to it. Love wasn't part of the deal...produce kids or don't get married.


Reposted for Relevance...

Top Ten Reasons to Make Gay Marriage Illegal

01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all like many of the principles on which this great country was founded; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of marriages like Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.


It's sad that I've got this on speed dial...
 
2014-06-20 01:54:54 PM
i.kinja-img.com
 
2014-06-20 02:01:28 PM

Theaetetus: [i.kinja-img.com image 320x320]


i... can't look away.
 
2014-06-20 02:04:12 PM

Weaver95: Santorums comments from yesterday's march in dc were downright strange. He was saying that god sees marrage as an economic venture designed to produce children and that's all there is to it. Love wasn't part of the deal...produce kids or don't get married.


He's going with the Biblical definition of marriage, where God's first commandment was "be fruitful and multiply" and where all other marriages were property exchanges or alliances*.

*this isn't true, Rebecca chooses to marry Isaac because his servant was kind, and convinced her his master was kinder. The Bible also makes a point of noting that, while the initial bartering for the wife is done by the men, the woman gets to choose for herself.
 
2014-06-20 02:06:09 PM

FlashHarry: Theaetetus: [i.kinja-img.com image 320x320]

i... can't look away.


There's a macro for everything:

img.pandawhale.com
 
2014-06-20 02:14:41 PM
Santorum comes after the gay marriages.  If you know what I mean.
 
2014-06-20 02:24:53 PM

kronicfeld: Let me guess: if gays marry, straights won't marry, and there are more straights than gays, so less money will be spent on weddings. How close was I?


Close. As I recall, the argument in the KY case (hehehe) was that if gays marry, fewer babies will be born, thereby eventually leading to population decline and lowering tax revenues for the state.
 
2014-06-20 02:26:12 PM
Blue!  White!  And, of course, Red!
I declare a Santorum GIF thread!


i595.photobucket.com
 
2014-06-20 02:37:04 PM

TuteTibiImperes: What straight couple in the history of ever was planning on getting married but then called it off because their gay neighbors got married?


No, no, no. You've got to remember, in Rick's world, being gay is a choice. Being straight is also a choice. If gay marriage is an option, then fewer men will choose to be straight, because being gay will be seen as a valid option.

Now, for my theory to be correct, Rick Santorum would have to be a bisexual who finds men exceptionally attractive, and basically spends every waking moment fighting the urges he feels. But that's not at all in line with his public behavior, now is it?
 
2014-06-20 02:40:22 PM

propasaurus: kronicfeld: Let me guess: if gays marry, straights won't marry, and there are more straights than gays, so less money will be spent on weddings. How close was I?

Close. As I recall, the argument in the KY case (hehehe) was that if gays marry, fewer babies will be born, thereby eventually leading to population decline and lowering tax revenues for the state.


Because otherwise, gays will just marry straight folk and have babies, and snap their fingers, "If only I coulda married a dude!"

Then again, I suppose it did work for Marcus Bachmann, so maybe we shouldn't throw too many heavy stones...
 
2014-06-20 02:42:04 PM
i595.photobucket.com
 
2014-06-20 02:42:20 PM

hubiestubert: propasaurus: kronicfeld: Let me guess: if gays marry, straights won't marry, and there are more straights than gays, so less money will be spent on weddings. How close was I?

Close. As I recall, the argument in the KY case (hehehe) was that if gays marry, fewer babies will be born, thereby eventually leading to population decline and lowering tax revenues for the state.

Because otherwise, gays will just marry straight folk and have babies, and snap their fingers, "If only I coulda married a dude!"

Then again, I suppose it did work for Marcus Bachmann, so maybe we shouldn't throw too many heavy stones...


I'm suspecting that's how it worked for Santorum, too.
 
2014-06-20 02:44:59 PM
Every time you see or hear Rick Santorum speak, he has been thinking about gay sex.
 
2014-06-20 02:45:36 PM
He's a repulsive human being.

Sad there are people in this country who actually look up to bigoted morons like this.
 
2014-06-20 02:45:51 PM

Doctor Funkenstein: [i595.photobucket.com image 372x249]


That one is my favorite
 
2014-06-20 02:45:59 PM
Shiftless, good for nothing, lazy, gay men.

It's amazing how you can take any slur against any group the GOP has hated on and insert gays into it.

I guess the GOP secretly likes to insert gays.
 
2014-06-20 02:46:19 PM
Crate and Barrel's gift registry begs to disagree.

Also, to color-coordinate with your Danish cabinets.
 
2014-06-20 02:49:06 PM
Totally not gay.
img.fark.net
 
2014-06-20 02:49:43 PM

Lionel Mandrake: "When we continue to see a decline in marriage and a redefinition of marriage, you get less marriage," he said.

So, by increasing the number of people who CAN marry, you reduce the number of marriage?

Impeccable reasoning, Rick.  Truly brilliant.


Republican math.
 
2014-06-20 02:52:58 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: "Santorum's comments follow a legal filing last month by the state of Kentucky, seeking to overturn a pro-gay marriage court ruling, in which lawyers for the state argued that the state had an "economic interest" in banning same-sex marriage"

Lolwut?  I'd love to see their "evidence" to support this.


Under normal circumstances I would construct an elaborate parody post incorporating "Insane Troll Logic" and some manner of reference or analogy to potatoes in an effort to "demonstrate" that same-sex marriage recognition causes harm. Unfortunately, extensive sleep deprivation, resulting from late-night and early morning server maintenance, has greatly degraded my mental abilities.

/Potato
 
2014-06-20 02:53:16 PM

Gonz: TuteTibiImperes: What straight couple in the history of ever was planning on getting married but then called it off because their gay neighbors got married?

No, no, no. You've got to remember, in Rick's world, being gay is a choice. Being straight is also a choice. If gay marriage is an option, then fewer men will choose to be straight, because being gay will be seen as a valid option.

Now, for my theory to be correct, Rick Santorum would have to be a bisexual who finds men exceptionally attractive, and basically spends every waking moment fighting the urges he feels. But that's not at all in line with his public behavior, now is it?


It still doesn't answer the question why if a heterosexual married couple is good for the economy, is a homosexual couple is somehow bad.

I mean, sure, homosexual couples can't naturally conceive, but there's always surrogacy, invetro, or even adoption, which would have a double-whammy positive impact by removing a kid from foster care and the state funds that go to support him/her there.
 
2014-06-20 02:53:23 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Seriously, does he think that straight couples sit around all day thinking about what gay couples do, and get so depressed about it that they can't carry on?


Probably, I mean, he seems to spend an awful lot of time thinking about what gay couples do,  despite purportedly being a happily married straight man.

I don't worry about what *any* couples are doing, other than my own relationship, honestly.  Why do I care? Frankly, I don't care what anyone does so long as it's not negatively impacting my life in a tangible (as in: not completely made up... because Jesus... or something) way.
 
2014-06-20 02:54:18 PM
Man, I thought the well of Santorum GIFs out there would be more plentiful.  (Hmmmm...that sounds dirty.)

Anywho...

i595.photobucket.com

If you watch it for a bit you can almost here him say "Poopy Lube Dungeon."
 
2014-06-20 02:55:12 PM

Fart_Machine: Lionel Mandrake: "When we continue to see a decline in marriage and a redefinition of marriage, you get less marriage," he said.

So, by increasing the number of people who CAN marry, you reduce the number of marriage?

Impeccable reasoning, Rick.  Truly brilliant.

Republican math.


It's math you do to make yourself feel better...about the filthy, filthy thoughts in your head.
 
2014-06-20 03:02:30 PM
i595.photobucket.com
 
2014-06-20 03:06:12 PM
See, it goes like this:

Because there are GOOD, GOD-FEARIN MURKINS who oppose gay "marriage", those abomination "weddings" will have fewer attendees since no one boycotts good and natural and proper Christian ahem, that is, RELIGIOUS, man-woman ceremonies. Therefore, those weddings will be smaller, will require fewer planners, photographers, etc, will require less food and cake, and not as much money would be put into the economy as if they'd married for appearances rather than love.

Chesstzee, liblardotrons.
 
2014-06-20 03:11:14 PM

TuteTibiImperes: His logic is so convoluted I can't even begin to understand it.

How does giving more people the right to marry reduce the number of marriages?  What straight couple in the history of ever was planning on getting married but then called it off because their gay neighbors got married?

Seriously, does he think that straight couples sit around all day thinking about what gay couples do, and get so depressed about it that they can't carry on?

In the vast pantheon of stupid social conservative statements this really has to rank up near the very top.


Think about it. If two dudes get hitched, that is one marriage. But if gay marriage wasn't legal they would each marry a women, which would result in two marriages. Duh.
 
2014-06-20 03:11:46 PM
giving the child their birthright, which is to be raised by their natural mother and natural father

Well that's the most efficient comprehensive summary of everything that's wrong with how the legal system approaches the protection of minors that I've ever read in my life.

Speaking as someone who's spent years on and off educating people high school age and lower, natural parents are pretty bad about 30% of the time and about one time in ten they're so ridiculously, unforgivably bad that even foster care is a semi-attractive alternative.

We need to make it much, much easier for people to adopt kids (the above notwithstanding, foster care is also terrible, like Oliver Twist orphanage terrible some times I've seen) to get them two permanent, dedicated guardians (who cares if they're married, gay married single, living in different houses, whatever) and to take them the fark away from abusive situations  permanently.  Like, CPS takes your kid away and awards custody to the other parent to the extent you're denied  visitation?  Snip, you're no longer the parent, if the custodial parent dies or something the kid reverts to  his next of kin, not back to you.  And said kid can be adopted by a new set of parents that pass a criminal background check (and have no complaints of abuse themselves) within the week or so for that check to clear, with a nominal processing fee at most.

Throw in that parents  do not ever get final say on kids' health issues (vaccinations) or education (pulling them out of sex ed), and that only state-certified tutors may be used to 'home school' anyone, none of this parents winging it shiat, and we'd finally be on our way to basic sanity.
 
Displayed 50 of 98 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report