Then I think the real problem is what we are defining marriage as. I would define it as two people who have decided to spend the rest of their lives together. I don't see a need for the government to get involved in that affair, and I oppose people getting tax breaks and other benefits just because they have decided to live together and (maybe) have children.
I'm also not sure how you got the idea that it is cheaper to live separately than it is to live together. When together, the cost can be split, and it is a well known fact that flats/houses meant for 1 person are more expensive (per person) than flats/houses meant for 2 or more. Maybe it's just in this country, but I would be surprised if it were the case in the US as well.
I'm also not sure how you got the idea that it is cheaper to live separately than it is to live together. When together, the cost can be split, and it is a well known fact that flats/houses meant for 1 person are more expensive (per person) than flats/houses meant for 2 or more. Maybe it's just in this country, but I would be surprised if it were the case in the US as well.
