The Cost of Same-Sex Marriage Bans (Infographic)

Take Part sifted data from the Williams Institute, IRS, GAO, Census Bureau, the New York Times and Forbes. The resulting infographic, designed by Column Five makes me wonder why the Chamber of Commerce isn’t campaigning for same-sex marriage, along with half of their fellow Americans.

Take a look at some of the economic benefits:

  • The wedding industry would generate an additional $70 billion in revenue. That’s a lot of jobs.
  • State revenues would jump, as happened in Massachusetts ($111 million in first five years of legalized same-sex marriage) and Washington ($88 million in the first three years).

On the other hand, the toll on same-sex couples in places where they are not allowed to marry should have social justice advocates picketing legislatures. For example:

  • Couples who are forbidden the right to marry lose out on 1,138 federal “benefits, rights, and privileges.”
  • A $60 marriage license in Cook County, Illinois, confers the same benefits and protections that a same-sex couple would have to pay $10,000 in legal fees to obtain.

Last fall the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago published research showing that acceptance of homosexuality has changed dramatically over the last forty years. In 1973, 70 percent of Americans were certain same-sex relations were “always wrong.” By 2010 that number had dropped to 43.5 percent.

The biggest differences were among the oldest and youngest people surveyed. Although only 27 percent of those 70 and older supported same-sex marriage, 64 percent of the under-30 crowd did.

Change is coming, and it is for the better.

The Cost of Same-Sex Marriage Bans: A Infographic

Related Care2 Stories

Gay Marriage Up 19 Points in Maine, Says Poll

Pastor on Gay Marriage: There’s No Us and Them

Half of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Image from Take Part Infographic


Rin S.
Rin S5 years ago

Wow, interesting to hear. It still baffles me that people think it's okay to force their beliefs on others and restrict their rights to marry the ones they love. I still don't understand why they oppose it, so it's great to hear that my generation is becoming more tolerant and less bigoted.

Lauren B.

Here is a true and funny story. On the day the civil unions bill passed in Vermont I was waiting for my sister and kids to come to a restaurant for a birthday dinner. I overheard two very (what we call) old Vermont guys talking at the bar while reading the paper. One said "Well, the bill passed." Other one said "Which bill, civil unions?" "Yep. I don't see what the big deal is. I mean they've been here all along, right?" "Right!" said number two. "They don't call this the Queen City for nothing." "Yeah and it'll probably bring in a lot of business for the state with weddings and all, eh?" "Yep."
Made my day (from an at-that-time middle-aged lesbian)!

Lynn Squance
Lynn Squance5 years ago

So many good comments so far and stars doled out as I can.

Marriage is not a religious institution. If you look on the marriage certificate or actually listen to the officiate, the words "Now by the authority invested in me by (insert province or state), I now pronounce you . . . ". If it were a religious institution, there would be no need of marriage commissionaires, or in the US justices of the peace.

And this garbage that marriage is about procreation? How many people choose not to have children or can't have children? Does that mean that they are no longer married. Not to mention that marriage is not required for procreation. Just ask all the single mothers, or ask those who live in common law relationships.

All this right wing nut fanatical evangelical Christian hoopla we are seeing is nothing but hatemongering. And certainly, that is not Jesus' teaching.

WWJD --- he'd celebrate the love between two people, heterosexual or homosexual. It is all about love, commitment and companionship.

Excellent visual.

Jennifer C.
Past Member 5 years ago


Winn Adams
Winn A5 years ago

Same sex marriage should be legal in all 50 states in the US. I'd also like to see it legal through out the entire world. If you don't like same sex marriage don't marry someone of the same sex.

Vegan Tigger
Vegan Tigger5 years ago

Thanks for the article

Ness Watson
Inez w5 years ago

To all the same sex marriage haters; bear in your mind when you hate that Kim Kardashian spent approx 10 million on her wedding only for it to last 72 days;
Britney Spears had a 55 hour marriage;
you can marry animals in more states than you can marry a person of the same sex;
Larry King has had 8 divorces;
Newt Grinrich had affairs when his wife (oh, rather wives, plural. He did it to two separate wives) was very ill
Kelsey Grammer ended his 15 year marriage over the phone;
Jesse James and Tiger Woods were having sex with just about everyone while they were married.
And yet you all quote the bible and say that same sex marriage will destroy the institution of marriage!....

Abbe A.
Azaima A5 years ago


Elizabeth L.
Elizabeth L5 years ago

If marriage is solely for procreation why are 70 year olds allowed to be married?

Mark Sebree
Mark Sebree5 years ago

@Dennis D.

I agree with you that this will probably require a Loving vs Virginia type of Supreme Court ruling to make sure that gays have the same right to marry that heterosexuals do. However, the current Supreme Court is probably not the court that will do that. It is much too far into the right wing, and cares far too little about the people.

Given that 2 to 4 Supreme Court justices are likely to be appointed during the next presidential term, that means that it is vitally important to vote for the next President in November. As a clue to the types of choices that Romney would pick, his judicial advisor is Robert Bork.