those are for encouraging the NATURAL production of offspring.
this judge made his ruling based on ability to orgasm.
For whatever reason it still leads us to unintended consequences.
Would the courts allow a law that said only a man and a woman could form a Corporation? (doing so to engage in tax benefits and legal protection of personal assets)
Answer would be no based on the equal protection clause and the courts will use the same for marriage.
I'm not saying this is how it should be I am saying that legally this is what happens when the government starts granting goodies based on the sex of those involved. The Government should have never granted financial benefits based on married status.