I gave two examples for how the corrent marriage system isn't fit for gay couples and it should be enough.
Not really, I can't think of more than one, and even then it's not a good example or supporting point, it was barely touched, and boils down to "gay people shouldn't get tax breaks"
For darvinistic, its a scientific term for how nature explains things. Like Darvin explained things, that im not going to get into if they are right or no, I was using the term
DarWinistic. I had thought you might mean that, there was no guy named "Darvin" it's "Darwin"
For the 6% tons of sources but it really doesn't matter if its 2%, 10% or whatever so I'm not going to wast time finding a source, hell maybe I was even a few percent off.
If you're going to make a specific claim, back it up, don't just say, "You should know"
devorse were the husbant keeps paying the wife.
Oh here's reason that's not quite a reason #2! So, you have it stuck in your head that the mother has to be the one to take care of the kids?
Goblin, there's more to it than tax breaks. There are things that marriage also entitles, like if your spouse is in a coma, you speak for them, or just being recognized as a couple, things like that. You do realize that all of your arguments are based on human nature, not gay people in particular? It's far from out of the question that a heterosexual couple married to get a tax break.