How the mind boggles

Ann Althouse is mind-boggled that the "obvious" hasn't occurred to Charles Krauthammer (there must be something in the air; at least three times in the last six weeks, I've been present at public statements of otherwise intelligent people making otherwise intelligent argumetns that no one could possibly disagree with them).

Namely, it's clear to Althouse that gay marriage is different from polygamy. It's all about economics: "A polygamous marriage, however, puts a group of persons in a position to claim more economic benefits than the traditional heterosexual couple."

It seems to me this is just factually wrong. How do three people in a marriage end up with more economic benefits? And why is it okay for a gal not receiving those economic benefits now to marry a single guy -- or gal! -- to get those economic benefits, but not to marry into a an existing couple to do it?

I think Althouse has gay-brain. She's convinced it's a huge moral crusade, and good for her, but then she has to deal with a horde on the other side who also see it as a huge moral crusade, but going the other way. Althouse would be better off to argue that there shouldn't be economic benefits to marrying, at least not governmehnt sanctioned ones. Indeed, it's a bit hard to justify government regulation of marriage at all, but for the fact that all known socieites do it, and pretty clearly this is only because of the issue of issue, which is to say, children.