Author: Albert Lott

Today, 53% of Americans believe same-sex marriages should be recognized by law as valid (Gallup), and almost 70% of voters under the age of 40 support the freedom to marry.  Acceptance of civil same-sex marriage has been gaining more support over time, with a significant surge in the past two years.  According to Republican pollster Dr. Jan van Lohuizen, “The remarkable surge over the last two years can’t be explained by generational change alone.  It suggests that people across the political spectrum are rethinking their positions—and deciding in favor of the freedom to marry.”

Religious views on gay marriage vary and are not monolithic within any one group.  For example, nationally, 50% of White mainline Protestants and 59% of White Catholics favor gay marriage.  Twenty-two percent (22%) of White evangelical Protestants favor gay marriage while 38% of Black Protestants and 57% of Hispanic Catholics favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry (Pew Research).

In Rhode Island the public stance of the Catholic Church is against same-sex marriage.  But in Maine in 2012, for example, a group called Catholics for Marriage Equality published a Statement of Conscience (We Maine Catholics Say “Yes” to Same-Sex Marriage Rights) in newspapers throughout the state in support of secular marriage.   In part, the statement read: “Secular marriage is different.  It is, simply, a civil right.  It is not a civil right that compromises other civil rights; if this law is passed no religious institution or clergy person will be forced to marry any couple they do not wish to.  This proposed law is not about sacraments, or forcing religious institutions to act in any way that is not comfortable for them.”

In 2012, the Maine vote in support of legalizing same-sex marriage was 53% to 47%, which totally reversed a 2009 vote of 53% to 47% against!  The New York state legislature approved a gay marriage bill in 2011.  The remarks of one Republican Senator who voted for the bill succinctly capture one approach to religion and gay marriage votes, “I am Catholic but I am NOT just Catholic!” Current same-sex marriage laws in 9 states (including all of New England except R.I.) and the District of Columbia protect religious freedom by explicitly exempting religious institutions from participating in any marriage ceremony that conflicts with their doctrines or teachings regarding who may marry within their faiths.

Surprising gay marriage religious tidbits pop up in the popular press from time to time demonstrating growing support.  In December 2012, a lesbian couple exchanged vows in the first same-sex wedding ceremony at the Cadet Chapel, a Gothic landmark at West Point and spiritual center at the U.S. Military Academy.  On Wednesday, January 10, 2013, the 106-year-old Washington National Cathedral announced it would begin holding nuptials for same-sex couples using a ceremony approved by the Episcopal Church.

Since the state of Massachusetts approved same-sex marriage in 2004 a number of university research institutes and academic departments have evaluated the economic impact of marriage equality.

A study of the first 5 years of the Massachusetts experience showed that the state attracted increasing numbers of young, highly educated same-sex professional couples, called a “creative class” by some economists.  Economic development experts argue that state policies promoting tolerance and equality attract highly mobile gay and straight creative class members whose creative energy powers economic growth.  The fact that 73% of 18 to 29 year olds support legal recognition of same-sex marriage suggests that younger educated individuals will also find states with marriage equality laws attractive places in which to live and work.

A recent illustration of this workforce dynamic took place in Washington state when Starbucks, Microsoft and Amazon spoke up for the successful 2012 same-sex marriage initiative.  These forward-looking companies see support for marriage equality as a winning strategy.  Microsoft’s general counsel, Brad Smith, explained its backing in part by noting “an unprecedented national and global competition for top talent,” and that his company did not want to lose potential recruits to states with fairer laws.

Marriage equality in Massachusetts produced a $111 million boost to the economy.  Many businesses shared in the $111 million, but those associated with the more than 12,000 same-sex weddings and tourism experienced a wedding windfall (think of florists, caterers, bakers, photographers, hotels, restaurants, etc.).  Gay couples spent an average of $7,400 on weddings (4% spent more than $30,000) and averaged 16 out-of-state guests whose spending contributed to state revenues through purchases and hotel occupancy taxes and sales taxes.

Similar studies carried out on other states by economists at the University of Massachusetts and UCLA have estimated that extending marriage to same-sex couples will generate the following over a three-year period: Vermont will boost its economy by over $30.6 million; Washington state is likely to generate $88 million, and Maryland between $40 and $68 million.

The same economists project that Rhode Island stands to generate at least $1.2 million over three years if the state allows gay and lesbian couples to marry. The study also estimates that R.I. same-sex weddings would generate $400,000 in new sales dollars and that married couples would pay an estimated $786,000 in new income taxes over the same period.

Noted economist, M. Lee Badgett, director of the U Mass Center for Public Policy and Administration and study co-author said, “Allowing gay couples to marry won’t end the recession, but their spending still helps in tough times for businesses.”

Albert Lott is a social psychologist and Emeritus Professor at the University of Rhode Island. For 17 years part of his teaching and research involved the study of gay and lesbian issues.  Much of this work centered on marriage equality for same-sex couples, which he continues to study and advocate.

This series comes from a letter he wrote to Gov. Linc Chafee. Read Part 1 here.