Since everyone is so worked up regarding why gay couples want the same rights as heterosexual couples, it might be prudent to document how gay households are charged more but provided less.
This really isn't about arguing whether or not you agree with same sex marriages or you are part of an anti-gay group.
It's really about outlining the reasons for desiring protection.
There is no doubt that gay couples pay more in taxes when compared to the same income bracket hetero households.
Without the ability to apply the usual benefits that married couples can apply, that straight households with children can apply, and the basic filing options provided, taxes are simply a higher expense.
Most couples end up paying about three quarters and change more than their straight counterparts.
It's a great leap forward when companies voluntarily offer same sex partner benefits.
Those benefits are, however, considered income and are taxed when the benefits of a married couple are not.
Both partners have to supply medical coverage on their own.
It can get pretty sticky when filing taxes if one partner paid for all or part of another's health care.
Most couples in the family that either own property together or they have children together are likely to need legal counsel and representation.
Everything from their intentions to their monetary assets must be documented and legally regulated in order to make sure that family heirlooms to children stay within the immediate family.
Some gay couples find that even with their legal documentation, they have nothing backing them up.
If a couple wants children they can expect some very high expenses.
Men can anticipate adoption fees that can creep into the hundreds of thousands while women can expect to find about seventy five thousand extra dollars in order conceive a child.
There are plenty of anti-gay family arguments that have been interjected and debated over this point, but that's beside the point.
A family is possible but only for those who can afford the initial step.
Even after gay couples have spent the better part of their lives together, have filed legal paperwork, and have gone through every available avenue, death benefits from the government and often death benefits from the employer of the deceased partner are denied.
This can create additional financial hardships on families.
Non biological parents of children can easily be held accountable for a medical bill while simultaneously be withheld from making medical decisions for the child.
If there is no second parent adoption available in the state of residence, then the non-biological parent can find that while they may pay directly or indirectly for care, they aren't entitled to simple decisions.
The reverse is true with adult children trying to make medical decisions for their non biological parent.
We have all heard all of the arguments that state that if we aren't satisfied then we can change, or something like that.
It's quite interesting that while we are typically required to pay twice as much for life's needs and wants, our money is perfectly acceptable.
When it comes to enforcing those needs and wants, acceptable is not the word that comes to mind.