As the April 15th tax filing deadline looms, many gay couples are facing higher tax bills because they do not get the federal tax benefits that accompany marriage. The same is true for heterosexual couples who chose not to get married. Do you think this is fair?

Of course it's fair.  Marriage is a child-bearing union of two people who commit to raise up more little taxpayers.  Or, from another perspective, it is a sacramental union of two souls before God, geared towards the production of more lives.  The government has a vested interest in promoting stable taxpaying individuals, and is well within its rights to offer tax benefits to married people.  God has a vested interest in the human race, and for whatever reason has decided we are worth the effort to love. 
In the case of gay couples there is no moral or biological ability to be married as both participants are the same sex.  This is just a fundamental concept here, but marriage produces children and homosexuals cannot reproduce unless they perform extreme measures to do so.  Marriage, true marriage, is closed to them.  Imitations can and have been made, but they lack the essential aspects of true marriage.
In the case of unwed couples, there is no real commitment to hold them together should things get tough.  Bill wants to continue playing guitar at college parties, Jane wants to settle down.  Poof, the relationship is over.  Any kids get shuttled between the parents, or not, and grow up completely unaware of the benefits of a traditional family system.  This not only damages children, causing increased juvenile delinquency and increasing the likelihood that they never have a successful marriage, but it also damages the two adults.  Bitter feelings are the norm, and that is never good.  The good news is that if they live together long enough they become common-law spouses.  Why is that?  Because the state recognizes that marriage is between a man, a woman, and God...perhaps?  I don't know the tax benefits of being a common-law spouse, but all you people living together better watch out!
Homosexuals and unwed couples should not be afforded the benefits of marriage, because marriage is more than just a legal status.  It's a moral action, a lifelong commitment.  It's more than the state can offer us, and people lose sight of that.
From a practical standpoint, if the benefits of marriage were available to basically anybody regardless of their marital status they would simply lower the tax benefits of marriage.  Get real, folks.

God, the tone of this article sickens me.

We're twinseparable! Happy with his brother, the boy who refused to die

By LUCY LAING - More by this author » Last updated at 01:09am on 3rd November 2007

Comments (20)

They say twins share a strong bond - but the one between Gabriel and Ieuan Jones was unbreakable.

When doctors found that Gabriel was weaker than his brother, with an enlarged heart,and believed he was going to die in the womb, his mother Rebecca Jones had to make a heartbreaking decision.

Doctors told her his death could cause his twin brother to die too before they were born, and that it would be better to end Gabriel's suffering sooner rather than later.

Scroll down for more...

Thriving: Gabriel, right, with his twin brother Ieuan, is now a healthy 12lb 6oz at seven months

Mrs Jones decided to let doctors operate to terminate Gabriel's life.

Firstly they tried to sever his umbilical cord to cut off his blood supply, but the cord was too strong.

They then cut Mrs Jones's placenta in half so that when Gabriel died, it would not affect his twin brother.

But after the operation which was meant to end his life, tiny Gabriel had other ideas.

Although he weighed less than a pound, he put up such a fight for survival that doctors called him Rocky.

Astonishingly, he managed to carry on living in his mother's womb for another five weeks - until the babies were delivered by caesarean section.

Now he and Ieuan are back at home in Stoke - and are so close they are always holding each other's hand.

Mrs Jones, 35, a financial adviser whose husband Mark, 36, is a car salesman, said: "It really is a miracle. Doctors carried out an operation to let Gabriel die - yet he hung on.

"It was unbelievable."

"When I felt him kicking madly the morning after the operation, I suddenly knew that he was going to hang on.

"The doctors couldn't believe it when they could still hear his heartbeat the next morning."

Scroll down for more...

Rebecca Jones: 'It's a miracle'

Mrs Jones learned she was expecting twins when she was ten weeks pregnant. She said: "When they told us we were over the moon."

But at her 20-week scan, doctors had some devastating news. One of the boys was half the size of his brother.

They didn't know what was causing it, but somehow he wasn't getting enough nutrients.

Then doctors said his heart was three times normal size and it was likely he would have a heart attack or a stroke in the womb.

Mrs Jones said: "They told us that if he died, it could be life threatening for his brother.

"We had to decide whether to end his life and let his brother live, or risk them both."

They said it would be impossible to keep him alive afterwards as he was so poorly.

It would be kinder to let him die in the womb with his brother by his side than to die alone after being born.

"That made my mind up for me. I wanted the best thing for him."

At Birmingham Women's Hospital, when Mrs Jones was 25 weeks pregnant, doctors tried to sever Gabriel's umbilical cord to cut off his blood supply and allow him to die.

But the cord was too thick, and they could not cut through it.

As a last resort they divided Mrs Jones's placenta so that when Gabriel died, it would allow Ieuan to survive. Mrs Jones said: "I put my hands on my stomach thinking of Gabriel. It was devastating. I had said my goodbyes."

But the next morning Mrs Jones felt Gabriel kicking. A scan showed his heart was still beating. She said: "No one could quite believe it."

Gabriel hung on, and his enlarged heart started to reduce in size. He also gained weight.

Mrs Jones said: "They thought it may be because the placenta had been divided. Inadvertently, it had evened out the distribution of nutrition between them, allowing Gabriel to survive.'

When Mrs Jones reached 31 weeks doctors carried out a caesarian to deliver the twins. Ieuan weighed 3lb 8oz and Gabriel 1lb 15oz. Both were kept in hospital, but since going home they have thrived. At seven months, Ieuan weighs 15lb and Gabriel 12lb 6oz.

Mrs Jones said: "The boys are so healthy, they have huge appetites too. Ieuan is the noisy one, while Gabriel is always laughing, it's like he's just so happy to be here.

"There is such a strong bond between them.

"They are always holding hands and if one cries, the other reaches out to comfort him."

"Doctors tried to break their bond in the womb, but they just proved it couldn't be broken."

They're treating it like some human interest story.  For whatever reason, Gabriel is now considered a human life who deserves every chance to continue living.  But at the time, he was considered nothing more than a medical liability.  What's heartbreaking is that the mother gave up on what she viewed as a person and signed his death warrant.  "Let Gabriel die" she says.  Make Gabriel die, she should have said.

In stories like this you always hear about how hard it is for the woman.  How hard is it to take a principled stand, say, "I believe this is my son and I will not kill him," and then tell the doctors to focus on keeping him alive rather than on removing the problem?  Pretty hard...but it's the better way, damn it.  It's hard to drum up sympathy, it really is.  I mean, the only reason he's still alive is because he showed improvement after they performed an operation that was supposed to kill him or keep his brother from dying...isn't that progress in prenatal care?

Obviously not every case would be like this, but shouldn't we expend all options to keep a child alive before we determine that it would be so much "better" to let them die?

Ghoulish.  And yet another episode which confirms that doctors are not always right about these things.

Am I the only one who thinks that men are crying a lot more in public now?  I mean, think about it.  Politicians caught in corruption, that Nifong guy from the Duke case.

When did crying become ok?  It's a sign of weakness, a lack of emotional control.  Perhaps a lack of preparedness?  I don't know.  But when a person cries in public it means that they are exposing their breaking point.  I think that it's become a tool now...if someone cries a little it insulates them from charges of being a robot or something. 

I have to say that I do not respect people for crying in public, unless it is at a funeral or something.  I'm not against crying when it's appropriate.  I mean, sometimes I get misty when I see the flag and hear certain pieces of music.  Sometimes. 

But if I ever cry in public...well I'd like you to give me something to cry about.  Punch in the throat or something.  That's how you learn control.  My kids will never cry after the first few times I pull that trick.  Even then, physical pain shouldn't cause crying. 

Men are wimps these days.  Really and truly.  No wonder this country's in such a mess.

This article was interesting.