Here's one of the problems with crazy, irrational legislation: "Sexual orientation" (or "preference" or "identity" or "expression") remains undefined in the law. As clear-thinking critics have warned all along, chaos will result. It just may take awhile for it to be apparent. Here's a recent report out of Canada ("Wedding cashers: Straight pals want to marry - for tax breaks", by Lesley Wright, Toronto Sun, 8/6/05):
WHAT'S LOVE got to do with it?
Bill Dalrymple, 56, and best friend Bryan Pinn, 65, have decided to take the plunge and try out the new same-sex marriage legislation with a twist -- they're straight men.
"I think it's a hoot," Pinn said.
The proposal came last Monday on the patio of a Toronto bar amid shock and laughter from their friends. But the two -- both of whom were previously married and both of whom are still looking for a good woman to love -- insist that after the humour subsided, a real issue lies at the heart of it all.
"There are significant tax implications that we don't think the government has thought through," Pinn said. Dalrymple has been to see a lawyer already and there are no laws in marriage that define sexual preference....
They want to shed light on the widespread financial implications of the new legislation and are willing to take it all the way.
