Have you ever heard anyone ever give a single 'coherent' reason to be against marriage equality?

[haele]

48. Because it would create more married couples, requiring more married benefits?

Think of the revenue changes - instead of two single people paying single rate taxes, with no one eligible for all the potential survivor's benefits should one pass, you now have a married couple that might cost the government revenue or services because the household is now officially two people vice two households of one.
(Having just gone through the mechanisms of student financial services, I can see how that might be enough to get at least one of them something like a full Pell grant if both have low enough incomes...)
Of course, someone who makes that argument would be against federal and state benefits for marriage anyway. But that's the only reason I can see for making an argument against marriage equality that doesn't involve personal religious belief or ideas on sex.

Haele