Yahoo 知識+ 將於 2021 年 5 月 4 日 (美國東岸時間) 停止服務，而 Yahoo 知識+ 網站現已轉為僅限瀏覽模式。其他 Yahoo 資產或服務，或你的 Yahoo 帳戶將不會有任何變更。你可以在此服務中心網頁進一步了解 Yahoo 知識+ 停止服務的事宜，以及了解如何下載你的資料。
What's your reason for voting No on Prop 8 (and 102 and others)?
Outside of the obvious, that Discrimination is wrong, the state of California has made and estimated $500,000,000.00 from these marriages just since June 17th of this year. By that trend it Prop 8 would COST the state ONE BILLION dollars in revenue.
Now, I know, because I perform them, that the recent wedding have been smaller affairs, because people are just ensuring they are legally wed before the election. The big lavish weddings they would have make money even more - for the facility, the wait staff, florist, musicians, etc. Everyone benefits. It is a good source of revenue in these financially tough times. It makes good since for everyone to keep it legal.
Even if the volume drops dramatically, Prop 8 would COST the state and estimated half to a BILLION DOLLARS annually. Do you really want to cut back on the Police, Fire, and schools?
No on 8 just makes good financial since.
So what's your reason?
4 個解答
- SosumiLv 61 十年前最愛解答
That is a big reason for voting No on 8 in my book. I do freelance work for a local printer and the marriage boom that has hit CA since June has been very good for business. Not only for the private sector but the government as well in the form of marriage licenses. In hard times and in a state with a high standard of living that is a very good thing.
I also feel that there is no logical argument to deny these people marriage when they are willing to be examples of society and commit to one another (Something that hetero couples are lacking).
Children will not be "indoctrinated" into a homosexual lifestyle.
They either are or aren't from the time they are born. And if you were to continue that line of reasoning you must also reason that homosexuals could not exists then! Seeing as heterosexuality is pushed upon young children in the form of stories and fantasy at a young age. You would think then that the fairy tales, and all the other straight people they come in contact with would have turned them straight.
Anyways, the government has no right to intrude into the private lives of it's citizens in these matters. No on big government and No on 8.
- 5 年前
I'm gonna skip the religious and personal values about marriage since they are strictly opinions. Some of the reasons lie in costs, if homosexuals get married, the state, and businesses (working with the state) will have to change their policies to provide benefits to all married couples. They already have to pay for heterosexual couples and now they have to pay for homosexuals as well. How would you fix the current tax system if homosexuals were to get married? In California homosexual couples could get benefits but what about at the Federal level? Federal law has not recognize homosexuals as married couples should they get married. If homosexuals decide to file a lawsuit to the Feds for not getting the same benefits as married couples, it'll create a legal headache. There is also a fear of more marriage frauds as well. This is already a problem with heterosexual couples (like a US citizen marrying a foriegn nationals so she can come into the country) and if some people want to take advantage of the rights of homosexuals to get "married" for fraud purposes, they will too. There are not a lot of enforcement of fraudulent marriages now and allowing homosexuals to get married may make it worst on the court system and will cost tax payers money. It is not because of homosexuals marrying but others who will take advantage of the law. There needs to be laws that cut down on fraudulent marriages before homosexuals can get married. Until then, there's pretty much no hope for gays to get married.
- 匿名1 十年前
It's the yuk factor in play Their activity is yuk
Happy ya'll making money off it that the important thing right? Morality has no place in the is country right?
