...did "not receiving benefits" become "having rights violated?"
Seriously, this whole thing baffles me. It's worse because there are now MORE benefits being handed out. The ideal situation is NO benefits for actions, minus maybe tax reductions.
Fun fact: heterosexual couples tend to have kids, whereas homosexual couples can't. Ergo, a tax break for heterosexual marriages DOES make sense, as there will likely be children who need to be cared for, and often one of the parents will be unable to do full-time work in order to take care of them.
Now, please, based on that completely factual assessment, explain why gay couples, who can't have kids and therefore have no excuse for not having two full-time jobs, deserve any tax breaks. This is pure pragmatism speaking, here.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: