The (il)logic of emotion

So, I'm debating same sex marriage with a co-worker. While I don't support the amendment, I do support the idea that no law should enable same sex marriage.

I was told I hate gays.

No, I countered, I see no purpose for such a law. Same sex marriage does not benefit society, so there is no purpose to granting it through legislation. She claimed that they should have the same rights as a straight married couple. I said there are no rights, just benefits. All these benefits, except a tax break, are available through legal means that are non-marriage related.

AH-HA, she says. How about that tax break? No go, I said, the tax break is to encourage mom's to stay at home with their kids; no kids, no tax break. They could adopt! she says. Studies and anacdotal evidence says such kids are troubled and experience role confusion. Mom/Dad are necessary for well-adjusted kids. Even children raised in an orphanage aren't as conflicted.

But they want to be married, so they should be allowed.

They are allowed to make any sort of commitment they want, it just won't be recognized by the law because it serves no purpose to society.

You just hate gays, I'm told.

Sigh. Those with no understanding of legal philosophy have to fall back on emotion, even when it makes no sense.

I like pomegranites, but there shouldn't be a law that recognizes that fact. Y'know?