Seriously??

This is the the silliest "counterpoint" I've seen. Are you seriously trying to debunk the Times article because of its assumptions? Why don't you lambaste the font and the color of the newsprint while you're at it.

The Times simply picked numbers for illustrative purposes. The substance of the article is the issue. The real reality is, whether married for 46 years or 4 days, and regardless of whether you make 140,000 or 14,0000, there is a real, honest to goodness financial disadvantage to being gay couple versus hetero. That's the facts.