Given for granted that the constitutional rights of homosexuals are violated if their marriage is prohibited?

The state (not God) issues a marriage license. That license grant over 1000 protections, benefits and privileges in law - Many of which are either not available by any other means. (Social security benefits, joint tax returns, immigration, spousal privilege among others). The rest are only available by expensive and extensive legal documents to secure each protection, benefit or privilege individually.

So what they can do with a valid marriage license is the same thing that straight couples take for granted. They can visit their spouse in the hospital. They can file a joint tax returns shielding a substantial Proton of their combined income, they inherit their partner's property without a will, they cannot be compelled to testify against their spouse in court. My dear friend moved to Canada to live with his husband. Because even though they were legally married in British Columbia and the state of Mass, federal immigration law does not allow spousal immigration for same sex couples - even with two valid marriage licenses issued by the legal authority of a Canadian province and a US state.

Marriage, being a civil contract, automatically bestows many legal protections and rights upon a spouse.

Inheritance rights.

Hospital visitation rights.

Child custody rights.

Tax rights.

etc, etc, etc.

The very same incentives to marry that heterosexuals have apply to homosexuals as well.

That's the entire point of the stand for marriage equality - EQUALITY.

You can look up a list of these rights that come with marriage via google.

"rights that come with marriage" or similar wording.

You'd be surprised how many there are.

Inheritance rights.

Medical decision making

tax advantages

adoption rights

medical insurance and pension benefits

certain legal protections for example the spousal communication privilege

military housing

There are several advantages granted married couples that is not granted by civil union status.

Marriage by definition:

Noun

The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife.

Can't they just pretend to have a wedding?

They are obviously going to continue their disgusting behavior regardless of whether or not the law recognizes it.

And no matter who it is you live with, after two years you legally have certain rights.

Why then would they bother?

To infiltrate our society for the nonsensical idea that everyone will accept them and their goings on as "normal".

They are kicking up such a fuss at the moment that it is going to be hard for anyone to help them overcome their mental illness without being labeled as oppressors, homophobics or nasty people.

And I ask you, when did disliking a mental illness become a phobia anyway?

Have you ever heard of people who dislike schizophrenics as schitzophobic?

They are invading our language!

First they took, gay then queer, then made alternate meanings for the words: bent, straight etc.

Now they want the word marriage too?

Oh yes, I forgot about adoption rights, that sickens me and is a further reason that this should never be allowed!

And yes homosexuals should be treated as equals... AFTER they have been treated!

Their constitutional rights are NOT violated when they are denied marriage because the marriage protected under the constitution is the marriage between a man and a woman.

"What is the use of?"

None whatsoever. They have already been offered the have legal civil unions granting them all the rights and protections of marriage, but they denied it. They DON'T want to merely live their life together, but have everyone else celebrate in their marriage and be punished for having differing views.

Exactly what HUH? said. A lot of them are doing it for those benefits instead of love or true marriage. And I don't care if they grant them marriage, but that will just open the door for freaks who want to marry their cat, dog, or goat.

Are you illiterate?