Gay Marriage more important than National Debt and Economy?

[Professional Russian]

Now im not trying to be an asshole and anti gay marriage and everything im all for gay marriage but does it really matter more the National Debt or the Economy?

[AppealToReason]

Since it only impacts a small percentage of Americans, no. But it is important for those that currently want to get married. I know they are a small minority, but I do find it to be important that same sex couples are offered the same rights that heterosexual couples have when it comes to marriage.
Gay marriage is just one of those topics politicians throw around so they can ignore questions on the economy. I do find it to be important, but not as important as the economy.

[Professional Russian]

Its important but its not really important enough to ignore the economy. its not important enough to ignore the growing national debt. the national debt according to Here (http://www.usdebtclock.org/#) is 56,993,038,9--,--- (the dashes represent the rising of the numbers right there.) is gay marriage really more important than paying that back?

[AppealToReason]

Like I said, it's not to the majority, but it is important to those that currently want the benefits a heterosexual couple has.
As I am years away from marriage, I'm more worried about the economy. If I wanted to marry my boyfriend, I'd be equally worried about both.

[Gigablue]

Gay marriage is an important issue, but I don't think you can really compare it to the economy. It would be very easy to legalize gay marriage, just pass a law and it's legal. The economy on the other hand, cannot be easily fixed and requires hard work over many years. There is no reason why someone couldn't fix the economy and legalize gay marriage at the same time. It may not be quite as important as the economy, since it affects a small amount of the population, but it's still important.

[TheBigUnit]

The canidates sometimes gets critizied for talking about gay marriage rather than the economy, I believe gay marrige should jusy be a yes or no thing and get on with life...sadly congess doesn't agree

[MisterSix]

Your economy is an easy fix. Stop occupying other countries.

[organickush]

i dont think that the two issues are comparable, one is the economy, one is a civil rights issue. im not sayin, im just sayin..

[FreeFall]

Both are important, but in sense of priorities of our country I think it falls below the debt issue. Debt's something we should probably work harder on than fighting the stingy crappy people that refuse to let people have the right to marry, at this point in time.

[Human]

You can't just fix the economy magically. You can fix gay marriage magically however by signing a few papers and going "it's now legal to do this"

[DerBear]

Gay Marriage is only a spec compared to the economy. However both issues can be tackled at the same time. (I am not saying gay marriage is not important because it is)

The Gay Marriage law could be passed quickly compared to the economy as the economy can and will take year to repair. Experts have said that in the UK it could take until 2220 or even going to 2025 for us to improve beyond minimal standards. Where as gay marriage could be passed quickly compared to others. Sure GM it is a social issue and social issues take time to be changed and voted on but the economy will take years to fix.

David Cameron has said he supports gay marriage and plans to have it passed by 2015 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9425174/We-will-legalise-gay-marriage-by-2015-says-David-Cameron.html) however whether that means something or not. Because it has been a known fact that political parties have used social issues such as gay marriage in the past to drum up support.

However like I said both can be accomplished as one would take very little time to be passed where as the economy can and will take a very longtime.

[ImCoolBeans]

The two are incomparable, I don't really see how you could even raise an argument for that. It gets a lot of attention during election season because it's a pretty touchy topic that most people get fired up over; but I can't really put one in front of the other because there is nothing to base the "importance" off of.

[Cicero]

I agree that those subjects are way different. One is talking about a national well being while the other is talking about a persons personal freedom. Right now, it looks like the main subjects are the economy, jobs, and the US embassy. But Obama is for gay marriage while Romney is for traditional.

[deadpie]

Here we go. This one is simple.

Gay marriage should of been recognized a long fucking time ago, just like every right that took time to be given for someone that was a certain race or gender.

Is solving the National Debt and Economy important? Yes. Is gay marriage an important right? Yes. No State's Rights for gay marriage, just make it legal everywhere, fuck any state that is too uncomfortable with something that doesn't effect them. People need to move pass the stupid fucking morals they have and realize this world needs to keep progressing on a steady path. Legalize it everywhere, solve the national debt and economy at the same time.

Maybe my post is a little stupid, but I don't see why you have to have an order of what needs to be done before the other thing.

[TigerBoy]

Maybe my post is a little stupid, but I don't see why you have to have an order of what needs to be done before the other thing.

No it isn't. And I was recently reading that Jesse Jackson already said pretty much the same thing about State level control :

“If the states had to vote on slavery, we would have lost the vote. If we had to vote on the right [for blacks] to vote, we would have lost that vote.”
Jesse Jackson in the LA Times (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/10/nation/la-na-nn-jesse-jackson-gay-marriage-20120510)

Election campaigns in the US seem to be largely about showmanship which is always going to prioritise emotional issues that collect votes : the issues are chosen by importance to a campaign, not importance to your country's wellbeing.

[CourtingErmine]

Gay marriage is an important issue, but I don't think you can really compare it to the economy. It would be very easy to legalize gay marriage, just pass a law and it's legal. The economy on the other hand, cannot be easily fixed and requires hard work over many years. There is no reason why someone couldn't fix the economy and legalize gay marriage at the same time. It may not be quite as important as the economy, since it affects a small amount of the population, but it's still important.

You cannot tell or give the Congress to pass gay marriage laws, it's not that simple. It needs to be on the state level that the government passes a law like that, it's a local issue, not a national issue. Different regions of the country have very differing views. Now the Congress, specifically the Senate, can pass laws proposed in hearings, or by the President of the Senate, who is the Vice President of the USA. They are COMPLETELY different issues dealt with by different levels of government. That answer your question Professional Russian.

EDIT: Sorry, left out that the Senate can pass bills creating revenue, and destroy buearocratic agencies, like the EPA. All that makes more money. The US Government isn't that simple.

[duuli]

The economy effects everyone. Gay marriage does not. The economy will trump gay marriage any day.

[josh_9]

It's just a little way for politicians to get more fame and popularity from people!

[Thunduhbuhlt]

Tell me, why can't we do both? I mean we don't have to have ONE singular goal with America. We can do two things at once. But I would say the economy is of higher priority than gay marriage not only because of how far in debt we are and how bad the economy is as a whole but also not everyone is going to vote for gay marriage and we may have to try several times to get a bill passed making it take more time. But I'm almost positive nobody wants to have a bad economy.

[Sleepy Raisin]

Technically.. Technically the LGBT community would just be getting more rights over the rest of us, since they already have to right to have heterosexual marriages. Gay marriage would just be another right.(im just putting that out there, not that it has much relevance)
But yes, the economy is WAY more important than solving the gay marriage issue. Thats something that can be put off and dealt in the future, our debt is a major issue and so far our president doesnt seem to be helping us much.

Our country was built on freedoms and democracy, a government where the people choose. If the government just one day decided "Hey! Lets pass homosexual marriage without consulting our people!" thats just one more step towards socialism and one step back from what we were built on.

[AppealToReason]

If it were legal for same sex couples to marry, a heterosexual person could go out and marry someone of the same sex, so it wouldn't be granting anyone more rights than you. It just gives homosexual couples the right to marry and receive the same benefits a heterosexual couple has.
Saying blacks don't have to pay taxes or only whites can vote would be giving someone more rights than others, but that's not what allowing gay couples to marry would do.
Besides, I don't believe the majority should have a say when it comes to the rights of a minority.

[CrossingtheCourtyard]

Debt and fiscal crises are not justifiable excuses to forget about equal rights issues. You can't just say "Whoops, there's some more pressing matters to get to. Maybe later hun," to the 'lesser/other problems' be it queer rights, environmental issues, homeless problems, whatever (please note I don't mean to imply that homelessness or environmental concerns are 'minor issues' either).

[dontfiguremeout]

They both are important! Each political debate or something like both that will affect the whole country is extremely important! Now can it wait for a while till the economy gets better? Yes it can! But if people can't wait, there are states that allow gay marriages, so they can go there to get married if they really want too!

[CourtingErmine]

Debt and fiscal crises are not justifiable excuses to forget about equal rights issues. You can't just say "Whoops, there's some more pressing matters to get to. Maybe later hun," to the 'lesser/other problems' be it queer rights, environmental issues, homeless problems, whatever (please note I don't mean to imply that homelessness or environmental concerns are 'minor issues' either).

Just wondering, are you from Baltimore. I noticed that phrase "hun". Anyways, the only way Congress can pass this is to make amendment. Of course, it would have to get 3/4 approval from the states and 2/3 approval from Congress. I'm pretty sure that's the way it goes. That would let it become a civil right. I'm just saying, you would never get 3/4 approval from the States.

[CrossingtheCourtyard]

Just wondering, are you from Baltimore. I noticed that phrase "hun". Anyways, the only way Congress can pass this is to make amendment. Of course, it would have to get 3/4 approval from the states and 2/3 approval from Congress. I'm pretty sure that's the way it goes. That would let it become a civil right. I'm just saying, you would never get 3/4 approval from the States.

Nope, just a Canadian sticking his nose into the affairs of others. I to tend to attach phrases like 'hun' or 'darlin' on occasion. Just a quirk of mine.

[CourtingErmine]

Nope, just a Canadian sticking his nose into the affairs of others. I to tend to attach phrases like 'hun' or 'darlin' on occasion. Just a quirk of mine.

Ahh, ok. Explains a lot.