She's divorced and not getting any benefits.
All you had to say is that you couldn't come up with a valid response.
There is only one valid response to a claim that she derived some benefit from a five minute marriage that you don't get. She's divorced and not getting any benefits. What you obviously meant was that Brittany Spears would have derived some benefit from a sham marriage that is unavailable to you in a long term relationship.
If there were no such thing as five minute marriages and the divorce rate was as low as it was in the 40s or 50s, we wouldn't be having a discussion on same sex marriage. FIRST marriage itself has to be devalued. Now you can claim some kind of equality with the devalued marital relationship. Progressive liberals created a circumstance and now uses the circumstance it created to support something that is a complete aberration. The reason why your 27 year long relationship doesn't have the rights you think it should is because your relationship is an aberration, an anomaly, something outside the norm.
It does not benefit the larger society in any way, although it might benefit you personally in many ways. Harmless and benign aberrations should always be protected but that doesn't mean expansion of aberrations into the mainstream.
