Sorry, but nope.
Remember that marriage is not just intended to create a family bond (and certainly not just any old family bond - we wouldn't say to a gay couple, "Can't marry? Never mind, why don't you try and adopt one another?"). You are forgetting your own words (which I labelled Premise 9):
Quote:
marital status confers vital rights such as economic benefits and entitlements (inheritance, taxation, etc...) and, perhaps more importantly, rights to decisions such as resuscitation orders and rights of attorney over those who are non compus mentis.
When you realise that marriage is, in addition to its expression of love (which can be done separate to the state) an economic and social entity of great import, then I feel there is a strong case for permitting same sex marriage of equal status.
|
EDIT:> And as for "Incest is illegal, homosexuality is not" that is a cop out. Because (i) the laws on this vary between regions and besides, we are trying to go beyond laws here so we can decide what should be and not what is, (ii) the laws on a borther and sister not having sex seems to stem from the exact same (biblical/conservative?) tradition that has made homosexual sex illegal for so long - to have archaic laws as both the target of your argument and its support seems a little problematic.
Good try though manalone
And
smarm, reread my post. I tried to cut you off at the pass on this one. They are a smart couple and have decided not to have natural children (they would adopt like a homosexual couple). If you want to be even more certain. They are smart, don't want to conceive and have had an operation to ensure that there are no 'accidents' - they love each other and want to have happy healthy babies, which means adopting.