If We Legalize Same-Sex Marriage Then Straight People Will Commit Fraud


Dan and Terry are my favorite married couple. I get the warm fuzzies every time Dan posts something about them.
That's a fantastic super power. Mine is to bump my elbows on every door frame I walk through.
dan, stop being a right-wing piece of shit, ok. what the fuck is wrong with you. see motherfucker, this is what you are turning into with old age:

Speaking of Canada, note that in BC the government is now marrying straight people without their knowledge and in some cases against their will. I don't think they're punishing gay couples (or straight roommates) in this way yet, but it's only a matter of time.
you and terry are soooooo gay
Voting GOP is unnatural- if your IQ is over 100!
I wish these bigoted straight people would stop projecting their failings on us.
Do your super powers come with tights and a cape? Could you post pictures?
It's not entirely accurate to say that the problem Ms Everhart identifies doesn't apply in Canada. There's universal health care, yes, but there are also extended benefits plans available through some employers, and nothing stopping people from contracting fraudulent marriages to take advantage of them, except of course all the other tax and legal issues that arise when you're married. For instance, a person who entered such a fraudulent arrangement might find herself responsible for the debts of her legal spouse, so all things considered in a place like Canada it's probably not worth the savings unless you need specialized care that isn't covered by the government, you can't afford to pay for out of pocket, and IS covered by the other person's extended benefits. Of course, this isn't a gay thing: straight people have been able to enter marriages of convenience since there have been marriages.
Sue Everhart's prediction ignores how a phony straight marriage would be far simpler and easier to integrate into one's life than a gay one. If you're going to this much trouble to gain the system for underserved benefits, why complicate "yall's" lie and relationships further by falsely claiming to be gay when you're actually straight?
Everhard gets to her real point in the second quote; That homosexuality is simply unnatural, which she and her ilk believe inoculates these ridiculous predictions from common sense analysis. It only works with like-minded bigots when preaching feel-good-about-being-superior shtick to an ever shrinking choir, even in Georgia.
Tab A fits into slot B, but also into slot C and slot D. Surely this is part of God's plan.
Wasn't this basically the plot of an Adam Sandler movie? Is his ouvre the basis for their understanding of public policy?
Straight people get married for tax, insurance and immigration benefits all the time. The only difference is that now one has to be male and one has to be female.
They obsess about our junk. They're worse than me!
11: that's a good point.
Well, Shelley and I did the impossible twice last night. Cause we are Wonder Women.

Dont bother wondering, these women have the necessary equipment, after a brief stop at 'Wild at Heart' in Ballard...
Coming from an area with a high immigrant population, I've NEVER knew a straight couple marry solely for citizenship. Nope, never. ~whistles~
@11 has it.
"If you're going to this much trouble to gain the system for underserved benefits, why complicate 'yall's' lie and relationships further by falsely claiming to be gay when you're actually straight?"

Fraud is even easier when you conform to the majority.
What @11 said.

I know several people who are married only to get the benefits. I was even preparing to marry a girl so she could stay in the U.S. (she found another way).

There is nothing "sacred" or "holy" about marriage. There never was.
This is so idiotic.

Straight people are marrying each other right NOW for all sorts of vaguely fraudulent reasons, and have been doing so for ages. Elderly straight people often marry to get health or pension benefits. (Or sometimes enter into Domestic Partnerships in WA instead of marriage so they don't lose benefits... depends on their benefit package.) When I was in the military, people would get married sometimes just for the better on-base housing and other bennies. Women have for centuries married men they didn't like just to have the financial security to raise their kids. Foreigners marry Americans to get citizenship. Dan even married one of his staffers years ago, just to prove a point. The list goes on.

If straights can marry each other for all these reasons, why would they instead want to fake-marry someone of the same sex?

Everhart is a bigot, and grasping at straws.
Frank Lombard had the same super power Danny and Terri had.

Does he get to marry the little boys he adopted?
Does Danny get to marry his hand?

Is he a closet bigamist?
I got domestically-partnered so my now-husband could have health insurance. We probably would have gotten secret-married if my company at the time didn't recognize domestic partnerships. Good friends of mine actually did get secret-married about 6 months before their "real" wedding, so she could have insurance...

So yeah. Straight people do it all the time...
Marriage equality is being embraced by the mainstream, and state by state it's being legalized without the dire consequences predicted by the Christian extremists. So now their arguments and predictions are getting even more breathless, shrill, and absurd.
@11 - you wins the prize for best concise yet thorough response to an idiot. Well done.

Maybe she just got done watching "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry" ...
Same-sex sex is "unnatural", is it?
Well, I'll just leave this here.
ahh yes, my father, the CPOS that he is/was, who touts the "sanctity of marriage" any chance he gets, several times suggested to my dear mother that they remarry "in name only" for financial benefits. he completely failed to see the hypocrisy. he failed at pretty much everything, but still regards himself as sooo much more righteous than "those goddamn queers!" grrr.
Maggie Gallagher has a green card marriage and she is the leading "traditional marriage" advocate.
So, hypothetically, I'm straight....

And I have a bro who needs insurance. So I decide to fraudulently gay-marry him just so I can carry him on my employer-provided policy.

Then I meet the woman of my dreams and want to straight-marry her. But first I need to convince her that I'm really straight, and my gay-marriage with my bro is just a fraud for insurance purposes.

Then I have to I have to divorce my best bud. But I'm in a m in a community property state. The dude is now entitled to half my assets. And possibly alimony. And in the meantime, he's gone crazy with his credit card and run up $30,000 worth of high-interest debt, and I'm legally responsible for half of it.

But, you know, my bff has had health insurance in the meantime. So I was glad to do it.

No equipment for a sexual relationship? I hear they do just fine. Maybe someone could send him some links?
Calling gay sex "impossible" is just the flipside of the "[heterosexual] anal sex keeps us pure in the eyes of the Lord and doesn't really count" school of thought. Keep dreaming with both of those.
I personally know straight people who were merely friends, not even couples, who got married for the health insurance. I even know one where the travel benefits (one partner worked for an airline) were a motivating factor.

So, yeah, fraud marriages by straight people to "take advantage" of the system: going on for decades, if not more.
The only people I have known who married fraudulently were three straight couples who married for immigration reasons. And by fraudulent I mean legally fraudulent.

If we want to add just dishonestly then, I have to admit, that prize goes to gay men marrying women in order to convince others (and sometimes themselves) they are aren't gay.

So no matter how many straight people might enter into same sex marriages for fraudulent and dishonest reasons, those numbers will never come close to those who enter in to opposite sex marriages for fraudulent or dishonest reasons.

So to follow Everhart's illogical line of reasoning the only solution is to ban ALL marriage.
As Mr Fortunate brings up, can anyone seriously think that this will ever be anywhere near the level of marriages of unsuited orientations?

This is perhaps the one place where I can stand a THINK OF THE CHILDREN argument. As in, Dear Mr/Mrs Bigot, Let the Ls and the Gs marry each other and then they WON'T marry YOUR (fine upstanding) heterosexual sons and daughters. While there are some sufficiently zealous sorts who view conversion through marriage as a path to sainthood, most don't want what looks icky to them anywhere near.

I could almost see campaign pieces along such a line, using salt-of-the-earth fiftyish/sixtyish types to describe how it was when their child's spouse came out as L or G. There are so many possible tones that could take.
I met a Brazilian gay man who married a straight woman for immigration purposes.