A “prenup” implies a “nup” or “nuptial” relationship which is my whole point

Gays have tried very hard to protect their rights in the past (many being lawyers) and have instigated carefully crafted legal documents giving power of attorney, contracts etc.

However, the government does not recognise them as “related”. Whereas heterosexual couples are. This leads to a number of subtle inequalities in the law, such as being denied visitation rights, denied a say over burial/cremation, lack of protection under domestic violence laws, etc. There are cases of blood-relatives successfuly disputing wills and other contracts due to their status as blood relatives.

As you know I fully support civil unions. I think it is ludicrous to deny gays equal rights under the law.

As for the religious view: Adultery is one of the big 10 yet adulterers may marry. Even if homosexuality is a horrible sin adultery is a greater one. So stuff em.

But after reading your example I think I have found a solution.

A prenup!