[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
Again, I think you are confusing a legal issue with a sexual one. Many married people do not have sex at all. Many unmarried people do have sex. Many heterosexual married couples have "unnatural" or "non-procreative" sex.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am well aware of this. I still maintain that the issue of marriage is related to sexuality.

[ QUOTE ]
Issues of sexuality and what people consider "normal" have nothing to do with the legal protections of marriage, which is what homosexuals want and what the OP was addressing.


[/ QUOTE ]

If the legal protections were only related to the couple, then I'd be OK with it. Trouble is, marriage involves more than just two adults. It is the buliding block for a family which involves children.

I didn't see anywhere in the OP where children were explicity mentioned which IMO is unfortunate because the issue is complex enough to warrant specific attention.

If the important stuff is just the tax benefits, inheritance issues (from partner to partner, not partner to children), and other legal issues affecting only the adults, why not just demand "equivalent to marriage" status on those? Why go for the whole nine yards and demand full marriage?

BTW I'm also OK with the state getting out of the marriage business altogether, which I believe is acceptable to most of the gay community.