5:4, of course

[james_davis_nicoll]

Bare majority of US Supreme drags US kicking and screaming into the Century of the Anchovy.

Comments

[graydon saunders (from livejournal.com)]

Patriarchy kinda depends from controlling who has sex with whom.

Religion's a weak reed these days; to many facts, too much utility to the methodological naturalism, too much obvious expense to trying to substitute faith for facts.

So a cultural rise in "why do we care who has sex with whom? I mean, aside from active consent?" directly threatens the remaining livelihood of people making money off of morals. (And indirectly a whole lot of "because I'm the man" mechanisms.) Going the next step and making those choices legally legit just makes it worse from the "money from morals" POV.

I mean, keep that up, and the general public cultural norms are going to start noticing that we've got an explanation for diversity and variation, we don't have an explanation for exalting anything as an ideal, and then where will we be?

[ethelmay.livejournal.com]

In addition, there's no obvious hierarchy in a same-sex marriage, which means people might get the idea that marriage can be -- gasp -- EGALITARIAN!

[dbdatvic.livejournal.com]

Heh. "And people will ask us, 'which one's the girl?' / 'cause they limit themselves to those roles in their world... / but we don't have any such models to clone - / we're perfectly free to develop our own!" - Romanovskly & Phillips, _Give Me a Homosexual_

--Dave, quietly subversive for several decades now