by Meg Smolinski

With the recent election, American voters took a tremendous step forward in social equality by electing the first African-American man as president. Many felt that our voices were finally heard and yet, just as we were moving forward as a nation, we have taken a step back as well -- four of them, in fact: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, and most notably, California included items on their ballots concerning equality for same-sex and unmarried couples, and in all four of them voters chose to exclude these couples. It's extremely disappointing to see America overcome one prejudice and not see it overcome another.

In order to better understand this issue, let's first take a look at the numbers. According to the Insitute for Women's Policy Research, 66% of voters were married and 34% were unmarried. Unmarried voters overwhelming voted for Obama. Of the married voters, more voted for McCain by just a five-point difference. Of the unmarried voters, more voted for Obama by a startlingly large difference of 32 points. Put in perspective, two-thirds of voters were married, and they voted 52% for McCain. This should have given McCain a big advantage, but unmarrieds voted 65% for Obama. If the majority of all voters chose Obama, and the majority of unmarried people voted for Obama, whether they were  young people, people in domestic partnerships, or gay people, then the question is why did gay and unmarried rights, an issue that would seem to appeal to those same people, lose in three states and get overturned in California?

Simple prejucide is the short answer, so one wonders, is it time for an economic argument for people's right to marry?

The wedding industry is a behemoth. According to the Association for Wedding Professionals International, a total of 2,160,000 weddings occurred in the United States from December 2005 to December 2006. During this time Americans spent approximately $86 billion on weddings (not counting the honeymoon or new household items!). The math is simple, the more people who are allowed to marry, the more spending there will be on weddings. The more spending there is, the more jobs there are in the catering industry, hospitality, event planning, and even in the municipal government as more people apply for marriage licenses and seek out a justice of the peace. With talk of our recession becoming a depression, perhaps same-sex marriage should be sold less as a civil right or a matter of social justice, and seen more as a means to an economic stimulus.

Meg Smolinski is an executive assistant who lives and works in Washington, DC.