I did not have sexual relations with that woman in Florida!
A man and woman will get legally married. One of them will have a sex-change operation, and have his/her sex legally changed. They will stay married.
Now you will have two people of the same sex married legally. Gays will point to this as a reason why they should be able to marry too.
All legislation defending marriage needs to be clear that marriage can only be between someone that is and was always a woman, and someone that is and was always a man. The legislation might also have to be cruel in that those few people who are of an ambiguous sex can never be married.
Either that or small loopholes will allow truckloads of gays to drive through.
But of course this will never happen because:
1) Idiots will claim that DOMA is real simple and shouldn't require any complicated language, or
2) Prudes will claim that they don't want their beautifully crafted laws to be filled with references to trannies, or
3) People who live in caves will claim there is no need to make sure the laws are perfectly clear, because small ambiguities in laws have NEVER led to those laws being so misinterpreted that they ended up having the opposite result of that intended.
florida news ping?
I think this is an easy fix...don’t say “sexual intercourse” in the text of the law. Use another, more inclusive phrase...and of course define it. “Sexual activity”, which could mean exchange of bodily fluids, oral to genital contact, genital-genital contact, anal-genital contact, or the use of sexual toys or vibrators in the pursuit of sexual congress.
Mere manual contact with the genitals and kissing can be left out, if these are determined to not have a dangerous effect upon the health of the none-HIV person.
I mean, come on, this is not rocket science.
Some people call this education.
The question is whether the law is working as intended. Perhaps some of the people voting on it meant that it ONLY apply to conventional sex...and that party animals would be on their own.