The Real Reason Gays Are Not Allowed To Marry

On October 21, 1936, our 32nd American President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, said to the people at Worcester, Massachussets, “Taxes, after all, are dues that we pay for the privileges of membership in an organized society.” So what is this organized society and why am I a member of it? I have a membership to SAM’S Club by my own choice. I was a member of the National Spelological Society only after I voluntarily filled out an application and paid my dues. If I wanted to be a member of the National Rifle Association then I too would be doing the same thing. Even with banking you won’t be a member of a credit union unless you apply and are accepted.

So what does it mean when our government says that we have a “membership” into a “society.” In all the above examples, memberships are something that you individually volunteer to be in. You aren’t really “born into” any membership. Or are we?

In my above examples when I become a member of SAM’S Club, they give me a membership number on my membership card. When I became a member of the NSS I received a membership number on my membership card. I would assume that the NRA would be the same. And likewise with my banking I also have a membership number. But for this membership into this society do we have a similiar situation? Well, it seems that we do.

In 1935 the government passed the Social Security Act. In this act normal citizens were allowed to sign up for an insurance and retirement program. In exchange for their membership they paid their dues and the government through the Social Security Administration issued membership numbers. Prior to 1935 the government had this same plan and enumerated their participants, their government employees, with Social Security Numbers. The act simply allowed non-government employees to join under the plan – of course, so long as they paid their membership fees.

However, even back then the people still had a choice to be a part of the plan. They still had a choice on whether to join. In fact, the Enumeration at Birth program wasn’t even established until 1989. Here is the werd part though… FDR said that taxes a part of a membership of a society. So one should assume that if you are a member of the society (presumably in this case, an American) then you pay taxes. Right?


Taxes are everywhere and generally everyone will come in contact with them somehow. I want to zero in on the income taxes though. The biggest change to the the tax code was a few years after the Social Security Act of 1935 with the Revenue Act of 1942. In the 1942 edition the Subtitle C code was introduced which incorporated the language, almost verbatim, from the Social Security Act of 1935. Is this just a coinscidence? Doubtful.

Could it be that with the Social Security Act of 1935 the government radically changed who we are? Or made us join in on a membership of which we didn’t even know about? To me, it seems that way. Even the SSA admits that one does not need to have a SSN to live or work in America.

Today we are given SSNs at birth by our parents with the encouragement of the doctors. The process is easy and the hospital does all the work for you. You simply check off a box and bam, they give you a SSN.

I am way off tangent here because the real reason I wanted to write is because I find it interesting how gay people are not allowed to marry. Quite honestly, politicians don’t care who does what behind closed doors. Many American’s don’t care either. So, why are they not allowed? I think the answer to this lies in the tax question. Married people are likely to have children, which will be automatically enrolled into the Social Security program. The SSN cannot be revoked, removed, deleted, or nullified. So once you have a number, you will have that number until you die. So, anytime you use that membership number on certain things – there will be certain legal implications of using that number. In this case, I am proposing that you are submiting your membership in the Social Security program and thus you will have to pay your membership dues to be a part of that society.

But back to gay marriage. Gay couples will never have children. They physically cannot produce offspring. So, they will never be bringing new members into the taxation system. So, since they never will bring new children into the system, it is to the government’s benefit to keep them at a higher [single] rate. It is the government’s little ploy to try to get gay people to be straight and procreate to get more members.

So there you have it, that is why gay people are not treated equally under the tax laws.


4 Responses to “The Real Reason Gays Are Not Allowed To Marry”

  1. 1 Alan Scott
    26 August 2010 at 19:25


    I debated gay marriage with you previously. I frankly do not want to do it again. However, seeing how you used Social Security and procreation as reasons why the government is against gay marriage, I can’t resist attacking what I see as flaws in your arguments.

    ” Gay couples will never have children. ” Totally inaccurate. There are so many ways around this that it is not close. Gay couples can bring in surrogate mothers. Lesbians can be artificially inseminated. While I’m not up on current adaption law, I’m sure it happens. If you say that adaption does not increase the US population, I argue that it does probably give a higher survival rate for unwanted babies. And then there are foreign adaptions.

    As someone who is against gay marriage, I believe I can assure you that increased taxation is not even a thought for those on my side pressuring politicians to not allow it.

  2. 26 August 2010 at 20:16

    @Alan Scott:
    *Shaking head*. Gay couples will never have natural children together.

    A gay couple bringing in surrogate mothers (or fathers) is a legal contract. The blood-parents will still have the birth certificate and the SS-5 filled out.

    Lesbians being artificially inseminated I am not totally sure. The male donor has probably given up their right as a participant to the birth certificate, so at that point it is still up to the mother to fill out the SS-5. And at that point the government doubly wins by keeping her at a single rate and the baby as a new taxpayer.

    Adoption laws and foreign adoptions are the same. The blood parents will likely fill out the SS-5 and create a new taxpayer.

    I never said that the individuals are thinking of taxation on this issue. For most, it is a moral issue. But I think that there are plenty of people that drive policy that don’t want it for fiscal issues.

  3. 3 Alan Scott
    27 August 2010 at 18:28


    As you say, gay couples won’t generally have children together. There are also those who are married and have children and then divorce and pursue their new status later in life. They are then not much different than heterosexuals who find new partners.

  4. 28 August 2010 at 02:02

    @Alan Scott,
    And in that case, that person had a natural birth of a child through a heterosexual relationship. They, both parents, are still signing or not signing the SS-5 form. My position is fortified by your point here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

"Politicians and diapers both need to be changed, and for the same reason." - Anonymous

"Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it." - William Penn

"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country" - Hermann Goering

"I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do this I keep on doing." - Romans 7:18-19

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain



%d bloggers like this: