1 new of 293 responses total.
Re resp:163: > Government's interest in marriage and need to control it is partly > due to concerns for children. Who takes care of the kids? This > is important, but pretty much only for heterosexual marriages. But we don't limit heterosexual marriage to people who are fertile. > There are employment benefits for married people. These benefits > are getting quickly weaker, even now. If you don't think it > would hurt married couples to have a lot of what are currently > known as "domestic partnerships" declared "marriages", you just > simply aren't paying attention to what the insurance companies > are doing now. So basically, you're justifying discrimination as a way to artificially limit the demand for insurance? Besides, I'm not convinced the impact would be that great -- I suspect the majority of homosexual partnerships are two-income households, and the number of partnerships nationwide is pretty small compared to the overall population.
You have several choices: