There’s been a similarly large fuss over gay marriage in the UK, where 1) the NHS provides healthcare to everyone and 2) existing civil partnership legislation gave gay couples all the benefits of straight couples. So I don’t think that practical issue is very important.
(Also, there are many far easier ways of getting health insurance than by upsetting arguably the most important institution in the history of the world!)
Your observation on this subject disagrees with mine. I’d say there was significantly less fuss about gay marriage in the UK. I suggest this is selection effect on one or both of our parts.
There’s been a similarly large fuss over gay marriage in the UK, where 1) the NHS provides healthcare to everyone and 2) existing civil partnership legislation gave gay couples all the benefits of straight couples. So I don’t think that practical issue is very important.
(Also, there are many far easier ways of getting health insurance than by upsetting arguably the most important institution in the history of the world!)
Your observation on this subject disagrees with mine. I’d say there was significantly less fuss about gay marriage in the UK. I suggest this is selection effect on one or both of our parts.
Interesting paper on monogamous marriage: http://www.gwern.net/docs/2012-heinrich.pdf