[sageofages]

Originally posted by godfrey n. glad
The lack of a good argument is often signalled by ad hominem attacks.

In point of fact, yes, the reason for getting married is to get those legal and contractual benefits. You don't get married because that gives you access to love one another. You can love people without being married. Marriage is about legal recognition, in the form of benefits. What else is it NOT possible to have without legal marriage? Not love, not children, not happiness, not social acceptance (although that will always vary from person to person regardless of the type of relationship). The only things that are always off limits unless you get legally married are a few legal benefits.

Therefore, the denying of marriage to homosexuals is purely and simply a denying of legal benefits.

QED

Absolutely correct! I found it interesting to notice today that Rosie O'Donnell said she and her partner petitioned for spousal priviledge during her legal actions against the "Rosie Magazine" episode and were denied it because they could not legally marry. As a result, the opposing litigant had full access to Rosie's partner, Kelly Carpenter, and all correspondence and private communications that would normally be excluded in a "married" couple....all because they are a homosexual couple. Where is the fairness and equitable status for all in the legal system with that happening? Because they are gay, they are required to do what a "normal married couple" does not have to do.

Ugh.