Forget income inequality — 'marriage inequality' is the real issue

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Jan. 16, 2014 12:04 p.m.

    DN Editorial staff:

    This does not violate your rules. Telling someone they are not an expert in sociology or other disciplines is not a "personal attack".

    Try again:


    I'm just reading and reporting what the experts write.

    And I've noticed, you are not among them.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Jan. 16, 2014 6:05 a.m.

    I am LDS 2
    What statistics are you reading. 70 of black children and 50 percent of hispanics children arevborn oit od wedlock. Whites are catching up fast. There is less divorce because marriage is on the decline. Liberals break apart the family and then fret about povert. The best defense against poverty is an intact family.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 14, 2014 4:42 p.m.

    Fleischer is 100% spot on. Of course Barack has never been interested in real solutions...only political ones that make him look good.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 14, 2014 10:38 a.m.

    thatthatguy: "There is indeed a strong correlation between marriage and wealth. The author seems to be mistaking correlation for causation. Marriage doesn't make people wealthy. On the contrary, wealth tends to make people more likely to marry."

    I agree that the author may be mixing correlation/causation a bit, but I disagree with the rest of your quote. Many happily married, well-off couples were not that way when they got married. How many got married either in college or right out of it when they were still poor?

    If you wait until you are wealthy before considering marriage, you are probably less likely to marry in the first place. But the kind of person who has their priorities in the right order and wants to enter a lifelong marriage early in life, is probably also the kind of person who will be successful in other areas of their lives (e.g. wealth).

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Jan. 14, 2014 10:12 a.m.

    JoeCapitalist2 jumped on the comments and preempted "the GLBT crowd". It seems those who oppose marriage equality are paranoid and overly sensitive.

    Now back to the article... the big challenge is to discover how public policy encourages or discourages strong families. Does anybody know? From what I have read, the statistics regarding families are better than ever - fewer divorces, fewer out of wedlock births, especially to teens, etc.

    Overall, people are waiting longer to marry, until after they complete a college degree, and those marriages do better. Overall, women are no longer dependent upon men for their support.

    Andrew Cherlin, professor of public policy and sociology at Johns Hopkins says:

    "In the '50s, there was an old-style marriage bargain where the wife stayed home, à la 'Father Knows Best.' That didn't work so well as women entered the workforce. It took a generation to adapt, and now the bargain is both spouses work, and they pool their income."

    thatthatguy is right. Marriage does not make you wealthy; waiting to marry makes you both more wealthy AND more married!

    How is that a bad thing? Where is this "disintegration" of the family?

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Jan. 14, 2014 9:53 a.m.

    The stakeholders (Democrat and Republican parties) are quite content with things as they are! An article or solution that mixes religious institutions with politics is unacceptable for most of them. In fact, instead of encouraging marriage, government has done its best to destroy it and diminish the benefits that flow therefrom. Let their be no mistake, marriage is from God-and that between a man and a women, no matter how many ill founded ideas to the contrary! Any leader worth his/her salt that wanted to change things in this country would do everything to encourage marriage. The voices of children, both born and unborn, are being smothered by the selfish, discordant, and trivial lives of irresponsible and immature grown ups.

  • thatthatguy Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 14, 2014 9:52 a.m.

    Ari Fleisher here seems to be putting the cart before the horse. "And the difference, he says, between the haves and have-nots is marriage. Those that have, marry. Those that have not, do not marry."

    There is indeed a strong correlation between marriage and wealth. The author seems to be mistaking correlation for causation. Marriage doesn't make people wealthy. On the contrary, wealth tends to make people more likely to marry.

    "For Fleischer at the Wall Street Journal, the solution is clear. It isn't to get the single mothers married after the fact, but to help the poor do things in the right order: School. Marriage. Children."

    Great, except getting pregnant currently costs nothing, and school is staggeringly expensive. Turn that balance around, and more people will pursue education first.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 14, 2014 9:40 a.m.

    But, barack huessein obama said the solution is to have everyone take out student loans and get a degree that pays well. It's that easy folks! If we have 50 million people become Engineers, another 50 million doctors, another 30 million attorneys and the rest politicians. Then all of our problems disappear according to the jenious in chief.

    Don't worry about having janitors, or roads repaired or plowed or teachers, police, fire fighters etc.

    After all we'll just bring in more illegals and use them as slaves, as we have for the past hundred years.

    Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!

    Oh, and wages won't go down when you flood the market with supply. According to obama, wages will only stay the same or increase with more of the same labor in the market.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 14, 2014 9:03 a.m.

    With that title, get ready for a flood of comments from the GLBT crowd around the country who never pass up the opportunity to promote SSM and tell all of us how bigoted we are for not saying that it is the greatest idea since penicillin.