The Case for Gay Marriage

by Nivedita Sankar (North Carolina)

The Constitution establishes that the purposes of the American government are, among other things, to promote justice, the general welfare, and liberty. Any other pursuit, including the establishment of a strict moral code, especially one based on a particular religion, goes beyond both the government’s obligations as well as its capabilities.
The issue of gay marriage is often viewed from a moral or religious perspective. However, these outlooks overstate the role of the government. The debate over gay marriage must, as all other political issues, be addressed from a policy standpoint that prioritizes the duties of the government as outlined in the Constitution. In purely economic and legal terms, to legalize gay marriage would be to enhance the welfare of the greater community beyond those directly affected by such a policy move.
Opening up the opportunity for marriage to more people will mean an instant influx of income to the state and hospitality sectors. For example, according to Bloomberg News, in the first year that gay marriage was legalized, New York City saw a net gain of $259 million in economic benefits. Approximately 10% of the wedding licenses in the city were for gay couples. As a result of the around 200,000 guests who travelled to the city to attend weddings for same-sex couples, the hospitality sector in particular reportedly saw tremendous job growth and significant economic benefits. In addition to providing an infusion of cash into local and state economies, gay marriage would also create savings for the public sector. According to The Huffington Post, “married same-sex couples would be less likely to need or be eligible for assistance since their combined incomes and assets would exceed program thresholds. Therefore, the state could expect a savings of more than $80 million in supplemental security income and other assistance programs” by legalizing gay marriage.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, comes the issue of equality and justice. In President Obama’s State of the Union speech last week, he publicly endorsed gay marriage and counted it among the nation’s greatest civil rights struggles, along with the movement for women’s rights and the Civil Rights Movement. For same-sex couples, the inability to get married means less financial stability, and uneven ground in terms of health care coverage and hospital visits. It also means that according to the state, homosexual individuals are different from heterosexual individuals, opening the door for discrimination in all areas of their lives. In a country who claims to abide by the principle that “all men are created equal,” it is intolerable for the state to promote intolerance and injustice.
Efforts to reduce gay marriage to the issue of morality both miss the point and are counterproductive. The government has no obligation to ensure that one religion’s view on something is preserved through the law. In the same sense, the government cannot force any specific religious organization to promote gay marriage; such choice must be left up to the individual. Discussing this policy issue in religious terms that, according to the Second Amendment, can have no bearing on the outcome, is pointless. Rather, since it is the government’s responsibility to uphold the tenets of justice and general welfare, the issue of gay marriage must be viewed from a utilitarian lens. Given that gay marriage both promotes equality and also offers numerous unique economic benefits to the private and public sectors, there is no option for the government but to legalize it.