There used to be a thing (at least in UK law) called 'common law' marriage where a couple weren't 'married' but were regarded as such because of the nature of their relationship. One thing this meant was they could use it to back up, say, any claim on a Will.<quoted text>
Many relationships are 'equal' in love. That does not make them marriage.
I agree that gays have every right and opportunity to purse legitimate rights and an identity for their relationship. That is their responsibility. It is not legitimate to impose an imposter relationship on marriage.
As to children, two distinctions.
1. Children in the natural home of their biological parents are at a significant advantage over ANY default setting. That setting, or as close as possible should always be the primary pursuit of society.
2. A ss couple ALWAYS deprives a child of one parental role. To do so deliberately should be criminal. It is narcissistically diabolical.
A great many families are either single parent families or those where both partners are not living at the family home. The amount of abuse by (hetero) step parents is very common, as is murder of children by them. From people (Ok, not stats) sharing their experience many site divorce and living with a (hetero) couple who are at odds with one another as deeply disturbing and something which must have effected them strongly enough for them to still be talking about long into adulthood. This is the nature of relationships. It has been said by some sociologists that the family unit although theoretically is the ideal (according to most psychologists) is in fact inherently damaging and dysfunctional to many - ie. it cuts both ways. I might suggest One reason children from SSM are less well adjusted is because of the bigotry their parents face; and beneath the surface is the thought that their family is not to be considered normal. Do you have the same issue with, say a mother and daughter raising that daughter's child, or where the father is in the mother role of housekeeper and primary caregiver because the wife is the one that has a career. Studies (no, I can't reference them, it's been a while since college) I recall conclude that it doesn't directly matter who (or how many) the bond parent or primary care giver is as long as the child does bond and is able to then feel secure enough to become (attach then detach) an independent individual within the family or whatever social setting they are being brought up in.
I would say most couples having children has some basis in narcissism.