|
Yorick, I note that the benefits inured to wedded couples contain financially-significant and respect-significant (sorry for the loose terminology -- it's late) benefits that are material to people of any sexuality.
Jerr, I haven't the time to provide a complete review of your list, but I do note that I would modify the language and consolidate a lot of the individual bullet-points. However, that would not refute the valid point you make.
What I'd really like to get at here, though, is the legalities. If all of the protections afforded (straight) married couples were provided to homosexual couples, would you be okay with calling it a "civil union" (or some other term) rather than calling it "marriage?"
I'm asking because the practical side of me focuses on the substantive benefits, not the nomenclature.
__________________
 
|