The thinking argued everywhere in Arkansas regarding so-called gay marriage is disengaged from reality. Marriage contracts are simple. A woman agrees to be sexually monogamous with a man so that he knows her children are his children, and his work to support her and her children is work to support his children and his children’s mother. All the rest is related to inheritance. In that context gay marriage is an oxymoron. With modern genetic testing, we can reasonably dispense with marriage for establishing paternity, but I doubt that will satisfy the advocates for gay marriage. The fight is not now nor has it ever been about some purported right to marry as such a thing has never existed. As things stand, any person can copulate with any other person without restriction, so it’s not about sex or “love” either. Finally, it’s not about inheritance for shared or adopted heirs, because no heirs were included in arguments regarding the tax law case at the US Supreme Court, whose decision Piazza relies upon for this novel judgement. No, this is about enforcing tolerance of depravity with the force of law, complete with punishment for rejecting depravity as such. If tomorrow the people of Arkansas amended their law to disregard all marriages, that, too, would be found unconstitutional by men such as Piazza.