The fact is, her marriage is nothing more than a feel-good sham without any moral, religious, or even legal weight. It is the adult equivalent of two children playing house, and commands no more gravitas.
No, the difference is that her marriage does have all the legal benefits and burdens of marriage under the law of the state where she lives. But she nonetheless doesn't get the federal tax benefits of marriage.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the Supreme Court should invalidate DOMA. I was just responding to the argument that gays can get all of the benefits of marriage by contract. They can get many of those things by contract, but not all, and in the case before SCOTUS the difference is worth $360,000.