But with the issue at hand you can and must compare them on the same level. If Company A is providing health care benes to the same sex partner of an employee because they can not legally get married and thus would never be eligible for spouse benefits then it is not only fair but proper that since they can now get married that to receive spousal benes they must get married.
To continue to provide same sex benes to unmarried same sex couples would be discrimination against unmarried hetero couples and thuse to be fair and just in their bene policies they must then offer spousal benes to ALL partners of unmarried couples.
I agree unmarried couples don't deserve benefits but you missed the point. Assuming a homosexual is a NORMAL "couple" is where you begin to compare apples and oranges. The day will probably come when a person will be allowed to marry a pet - so should vet bills be covered? I would hope not but suggesting that a homosexual union is normal is as normal as a man marrying his dog.