Posted by jrd_x on 6/4/2012 4:15:00 PM (view original):
It doesn't have anything to do with obamacare.  If companies choose to subsidize coverage for spouses, they can.  In that case, they'll also subsidize gay spouses.  If they don't want to subsidize spousal coverage, they don't have to.

Sure it does.   If you look at the big picture.    Companies stop subsidizing coverage for spouses.   More people are insurance-less.   Obamacare says "My God people, citizens without insurance coverage is now 47%.   We have to do something."

Think bigger. 

Posted by jrd_x on 6/4/2012 4:51:00 PM (view original):
So, legalizing suicide would or would not harm others???

2.  If you successfully kill yourself, I don't think it matters if it's legal or not.    It's those who suck at suicide who need to be discouraged from trying it.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/4/2012 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 6/4/2012 4:51:00 PM (view original):
So, legalizing suicide would or would not harm others???

2.  If you successfully kill yourself, I don't think it matters if it's legal or not.    It's those who suck at suicide who need to be discouraged from trying it.

You didn't answer the question.

Would legalizing suicide harm others?

I guess I'll try saying it another way.

When on successfully kills oneself, which is called a suicide, no one else is harmed.   Some loved one may suffer a little but I'm not sure the trade-off, removing a miserable person from your life, doesn't even it out.

When someone injures themselves, perhaps when failing to kill oneself, yes, it hits somebody in the pocket especially if live person is now longer capable of footing the bill(think coma).    I guess it depends on your definition of "harm others".


Get it now?

Your words in bold (mine in the first line included for context)

     They want to. Since allowing it doesn't harm me or anyone else, I'm not going to tell someone else how to live their life.

          Same can be said for drug use or suicide.   Legalize both?

The same can be said for suicide, that it doesn't harm anyone else.

So I guess your answer is "No, I don't get it."

FWIW, I think drug use harms society as a whole.   I just chose it because you seem to imply that it doesn't harm anyone but the user.

I don't know, is your point that legalizing suicide would harm others because it would somehow take away one disincentive to killing yourself (illegality) and therefore burden the taxpayers by forcing us to take care of unsuccessful suicide attempts that we wouldn't have had to take care of had suicide been illegal?  Because a person trying to commit suicide is worried about possible future legal problems.

My point is that suicide is not analogous to gay marriage.  There is no harm to anyone in allowing gay marriage.  You thought of a possible harm to legalizing suicide off the top of your head five minutes after saying there wasn't one.

I'll try one more time and I'll be brief to not confuse you.

Failed suicides and gay marriages will affect the bottom line. 

Thus they "harm" someone besides the participants.

Get it?

How do gay marriages affect the bottom line?

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2009-05-08/commentary/30686581_1_gay-marriage-wedding-industry-couples

You have absolutely no recall, right?

Spousal benefits.   

I care not to click a gay marriage wedding link. 

From the link you don't want to click on:

In another, long-term analysis, the Christian Science Monitor notes a Congressional Budget Office study, which found that if gay marriage were allowed throughout the United States, it would improve the federal budget's bottom line.

"The CBO calculates that same-sex couples would boost Social Security spending, because the partner of a deceased worker would receive 100 percent of the worker's benefit. But the federal government would save money on Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid, and Medicare," the report says.

Gay marriage does not hurt the bottom line.