Well, that’s the next step, isn’t it? Once you can’t define “marriage” as one man’s union with one woman, then it’s wide open.
We’re rapidly getting to the point of having no legal barriers to one man and 40 women, one man and one pet goat, or one man and one boy (though hopefully statutory rape laws will still keep NAMBLA from going there).
The only possible way to save this now is a Constitutional amendment defining marriage — for once this religious-(Bible-)based institution became secularized and subject to government benefits, it was only a matter of time before others wanted to have a piece of the pie too.
Exactly right, which is why I have become an advocate of getting the government out of the marriage business completely and returning it to the religious sector.