# Stupid Republican idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 26, 2009, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897 "2009-03-26T18:48:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 630
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12581 "2014-01-29T17:22:07Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Isn’t that what we have in the U.S.? You get a license, and then can have either a civil ceremony or a religious one. No. To be legally married, you have to sign a form that’s witnessed by a public official, but that isn’t even a ceremony unless you arrange some choreography around it. Many couples choose to combine that with a religious service, or even a nonreligious celebration of some kind, in which the officiant is deputized by the state to perform the legal bit too, but that is not _instead of_ a civil ceremony. Look closely at the next church wedding you go to and you’ll see the newlyweds sign a form afterward to satisfy the Gummint. > [@](#): > > I guess some countries require a civil ceremony, but we require a license and some kind of ceremony. We do not \*require \*a ceremony at all, only signatures on a form. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12582 "2014-01-29T17:23:38Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > “Kommandant-in-Chef”? Obama is unmasked as the Soup Nazi! ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12583 "2014-01-29T17:29:24Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Found something. The proposal is simply not to regulate marriage at all, and let religious groups decide. Nobody seems to know what is really being proposed, [including the proponent of the measure](http://www.news9.com/story/24543033/lawmakers-consider-preventing-all-marriage-in-oklahoma). > [@](#): > > “Would it be realistic for the State of Oklahoma to say, ‘We’re not going to do marriage period,'” asked News 9’s Michael Konopasek. > > “That would definitely be a realistic opportunity, and it’s something that would be part of the discussion,” Turner answered. > > Such a discussion will be made possible by a current shell bill – something that can be changed at almost any time to react to upcoming rulings on Oklahoma’s same-sex marriage ban. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12584 "2014-01-29T17:32:11Z")
Latest development: [Grimm is now saying he “overreacted”](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/michael-grimm-michael-scotto-apology) and invited the reporter to lunch. No word on whether he’s having a food taster come along. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12585 "2014-01-29T17:44:10Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Obama is unmasked as the Soup Nazi! And my apologies to **asterion** for not seeing his previous post on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12586 "2014-01-29T17:58:38Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Have you had enough of the lamestream media and their endless gotcha questions? > > If you’re Congressman Michael Grimm (R-Staten Island), there’s a simple way to get them off your back - [just get in the reporter’s face and threaten to throw him off the balcony of the Capitol Building while standing in front of a live TV news camera.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbpxVO-mnYU) Yikes. Is there a link with better audio? I couldn’t make out the Congressman’s aggressive statements at all. > [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Latest development: [Grimm is now saying he “overreacted”](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/michael-grimm-michael-scotto-apology) and invited the reporter to lunch. No word on whether he’s having a food taster come along. Maybe they can get the Kommandant in Chef to cater… ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12587 "2014-01-29T18:11:42Z")
Here’s a CNN link that has little enhance audio and subtitles: [http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2014/01/29/sot-ny-rep-michael-grimm-threatens-reporter.ny1.html](http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2014/01/29/sot-ny-rep-michael-grimm-threatens-reporter.ny1.html) ---
**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12588 "2014-01-29T19:22:36Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Okay, so you can have a non-religious private ceremony. > > My point is that the state licenses marriages. Wish I knew exactly what was being proposed in OK. I’ll try to find it. > > P.S. Found something. The proposal is simply not to regulate marriage at all, and let religious groups decide. > > [http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/oklahoma-divorce-marriage-government-video/#axzz2ro8YEeqd](http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/oklahoma-divorce-marriage-government-video/#axzz2ro8YEeqd) > > Problem is, that would mean absolutely anyone could marry, and could define marriage however they want, and wouldn’t leave much room for non-religious marriages. Unless you just wiped marriage from all legal recognition - taxes, inheritance, etc. - it’s hard to see how the state can’t be involved. Exactly. Marriage is at its essence a legal contract giving rights to and imposing obligations on the parties involved. Right now that’s the couple and the state. The couple gets to file joint tax returns. In most cases assets may be held jointly with right of survivorship. Children are protected. Insurance and pension benefits earned. If only churches would be allowed to confer this legal status on couples, it would not take long for paper churches to be formed that would confer the obligations and benefits of marriage on couples. BTW, it’s this kind of stuff getting very complicated that makes me leery about multiple partner marriages. I’m OK with the sex part, but how is it fair to force an employer to pay for health insurance for a family of six adult partners and ten or twenty children when other employees have standard families? (That’s just a small sample of the complications.) ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12589 "2014-01-29T19:39:57Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > No. To be legally married, you have to sign a form that’s witnessed by a public official, but that isn’t even a ceremony unless you arrange some choreography around it. Many couples choose to combine that with a religious service, or even a nonreligious celebration of some kind, in which the officiant is deputized by the state to perform the legal bit too, but that is not _instead of_ a civil ceremony. Look closely at the next church wedding you go to and you’ll see the newlyweds sign a form afterward to satisfy the Gummint. I know. I just wonder what the practical difference is between requiring a license with ceremony optional, and requiring a license and a civil ceremony with religious ceremony optional is. Either way, the ceremony is just, well, ceremonial. > [@](#): > > We do not \*require \*a ceremony at all, only signatures on a form. True, no ceremony required, just usually one of two kinds happens, I meant. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12590 "2014-01-29T19:43:01Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Here’s a CNN link that has little enhance audio and subtitles: [http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2014/01/29/sot-ny-rep-michael-grimm-threatens-reporter.ny1.html](http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2014/01/29/sot-ny-rep-michael-grimm-threatens-reporter.ny1.html) Ta. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12591 "2014-01-29T19:43:04Z")
> [@BigAppleBucky](#): > > Exactly. Marriage is at its essence a legal contract giving rights to and imposing obligations on the parties involved. Right now that’s the couple and the state. But unless the state defined such a contract as between two people, neither of which are already in other contracts, it would mean anyone could marry anyone, including poly marriages, or even perhaps corporations “marrying.” So the state would have to define it, if not license it, which is about the same thing. Then thousands of laws and policies would have to be changed to accommodate them. Not easy. I hope OK does it though, it would be hilarious to watch. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12592 "2014-01-29T22:55:19Z")
Fox News host: Women don’t want equal pay, they already get ‘exactly what they’re worth’ [http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/29/fox-news-host-women-dont-want-equal-pay-they-already-get-exactly-what-theyre-worth/](http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/29/fox-news-host-women-dont-want-equal-pay-they-already-get-exactly-what-theyre-worth/) ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2014, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12593 "2014-01-29T23:25:44Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Fox News host: Women don’t want equal pay, they already get ‘exactly what they’re worth’ > > [http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/29/fox-news-host-women-dont-want-equal-pay-they-already-get-exactly-what-theyre-worth/](http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/29/fox-news-host-women-dont-want-equal-pay-they-already-get-exactly-what-theyre-worth/) Gah! They should have some kind of warning on that picture with the Bachmanesque crazy eyes… ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2014, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12594 "2014-01-30T01:43:19Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Fox News host: Women don’t want equal pay, they already get ‘exactly what they’re worth’ > > [http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/29/fox-news-host-women-dont-want-equal-pay-they-already-get-exactly-what-theyre-worth/](http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/29/fox-news-host-women-dont-want-equal-pay-they-already-get-exactly-what-theyre-worth/) Carlson is mostly right. As he says, the numbers don’t lie. Most of the pay gap is attributable to factors like differences in the job, in qualifications, and in hours worked. Only a small part is unexplained and therefore possibly due to discrimination. At least according to this study: > **[Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf](https://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf)** ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2014, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12595 "2014-01-30T02:05:30Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Carlson is mostly right. As he says, the numbers don’t lie. Most of the pay gap is attributable to factors like differences in the job, in qualifications, and in hours worked. Only a small part is unexplained and therefore possibly due to discrimination. At least according to this study: > > [http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf](http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf) [Here’s a rebuttal](http://amptoons.com/blog/2010/11/26/how-the-consad-report-on-the-wage-gap-masks-sexism-instead-of-measuring-it/) that says the study was poorly done. > [@](#): > > 1. Typically, neither Robert or Ballgame mentioned that CONSAD used a radically different sample of workers than virtually all other wage gap studies. I don’t think either of them were being deliberately dishonest; rather, I suspect they both lack basic knowledge of what they’re talking about. > > 2. The single largest factor that CONSAD found “explained” the wage gap is the difference in hours worked. Since women are more likely to work part-time, and since CONSAD (unlike standard wage gap studies) included part-time workers in their sample, **in effect CONSAD is comparing mostly female part-time workers to mostly male full-time workers.** Then — what a surprise! — they determined that the difference in hours worked accounts for a huge portion of the wage gap they measured. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2014, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12596 "2014-01-30T12:35:48Z")
Lindsey Graham says the world is going to explode. [Literally](http://huff.to/1egcwmO%22). > [@](#): > > Shortly after President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters point-blank: “The world is literally about to blow up and our president did not really paint a fair picture of the threats we face.” ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2014, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12597 "2014-01-30T14:12:12Z")
Sounds like the opening scenes of various Superman movies. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2014, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12598 "2014-01-30T14:20:53Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > Here’s a rebuttal that says the study was poorly done. I’ve seen that. The first point simply doesn’t give enough information to judge. How was the sample different, and why was it worse than others? It might be better. The second one is simply repeating the same mistake! If women tend to work part-time, that helps explain the wage gap. Of course you compare women working part-time with men working full-time. As long as the sample represents an accurate proportion of both kinds of workers in both sexes, it’s simply part of the data. The larger point is this - regardless of how the numbers come out when you analyze them, you have to analyze them. You can’t use the raw data. There are other studies out there that also show that the wage gap is smaller than the raw data show. The raw data just throws everyone in one pot without fair comparisons. Of course a woman who works at Walmart earns less than a man who is a lawyer, for instance. Part of the wage gap is explained by the fact that men tend to have the higher-paying jobs, or more qualifications and experience, or even work more hours. You have to compare people with the same jobs and experience and hours to get a fair comparison. Every study that does that shows that the wage gap isn’t as big as the raw numbers show (though every study shows, contrary to what Carlson said, that there still is an unexplained gap that may be due to discrimination). Of course, the fact that men have the higher-paying jobs may itself be due to discrimination, past or present, though it can also be due to women’s career choices. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2014, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12599 "2014-01-30T14:31:00Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Lindsey Graham says the world is going to explode. [Literally](http://huff.to/1egcwmO%22). Why are you standing around talking to reporters? RUN, MOTHERFUCKER! GET TO THE SHIPS! ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2014, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/12600 "2014-01-30T14:41:54Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Carlson is mostly right. As he says, the numbers don’t lie. Most of the pay gap is attributable to factors like differences in the job, in qualifications, and in hours worked. Only a small part is unexplained and therefore possibly due to discrimination. At least according to this study: > > [http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf](http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf) Absolutely - this is entirely due to women’s career choices, and the choices they make. [For example, studies show that women are offered smaller starting salaries just for being women.](http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/01/opinion/urry-women-science/) If they didn’t _want_ smaller starting salaries, they shouldn’t be women. It’s just that simple! Likewise, when studies show people are more willing to hire equal-resumed white felons than black men, it’s obviously the fault of the black men they’re not being hired. Were they just not black, they could get those higher paying jobs. Instead, they choose to make decisions that give them lower paying jobs! I hope you understand why that line of argument is totally ridiculous. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=629) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=631)