Quote:
|
Why shouldn't roomates get the same prviliges? If some guy and his best friend share an apartment together, they have a houshold income and should be allowed to file jointly.
|
Do opposite-sex roommates get "the same privileges"
now?
Can some guy and his female best friend file jointly?
Quote:
|
If Bob, understandably, trusts his best friend more than he does any woman, why should his best friend not be the one to decide when to pull the plug at the hospital?
|
If Bob's best friend is female, and he trusts her more than his wife, does he have, under
current law, the right to appoint his best friend his medical executor?
Quote:
|
If Jane is the only one that Betty can really depend on, should she have to be a lesbian in order for Jane to take time off work in order to take care of Betty while she is pregnant?
|
If Jane were John, a male platonic friend of Betty's, should he
have to be having sex with Betty in order to take time off work in order to take care of Betty while she is pregnant by another man?
I'm just saying, anti-gay-marriage activists are so worried about the potential for two parties of the same sex to abuse the system and enter into sham marriages merely to recieve benefits... yet that same potential currently exists for two people of the
opposite sex to abuse the system and enter into sham marriages merely to recieve benefits, and yet nobody really worries about it.
It either doesn't happen, or else it happens so infrequently that it isn't any big deal.
Why is it presumed that if same-sex marriages were allowed, it would happen much more frequently than it currently does, to the point that it would actually pose some sort of problem?
Are two people of the same sex more capable of engaging in devious and unethical behavior for personal gain than two people of the opposite sex are?
It's puzzling, to say the least, why people are so concerned that this outlandish scenario might become commonplace... and why they think it would really matter if it
did.