Is gay marriage a litmus test of intelligence, or has anyone actually heard a reasonable argument against? What I mean is that I see intelligent arguments for Socialism (say what you will about persistent unemploymnet, but the French don't work half as hard and enjoy their lives), for voting for John Kerry (ugh) or Bush or Nader, for trade barriers and for Free Trade, for wanting to build an empire for being isolationist, etc etc. Reasonable minds legitimately differ on most issues before Congress. But what possible function is served by denying the legal fruits and burdens of marriage to gays? Just one?

EK: It's quite simple. Allowing gay marriage would change a crucial foundation of society and serve the interests of...could it be... ;)

RM: In Mass., none. Or in legalese: "[T]he marriage ban does not meet the rational basis test for either due process or equal protection."