The brief insists it is reasonable for states to favor heterosexual marriages because they are the “traditional and universally recognized form of marriage.” In arguing that other states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause, the Justice Department cites decades-old cases ruling that states do not have to recognize marriages between cousins or an uncle and a niece.Look. Gay pornography routinely dips into the brother bin by getting two dudes who resemble each other to fuck. Video tag: Brotherly Love. Authentic Real-Life Gay Human Person™ Daniel Mendelsohn wrote a turgidly lyrical memoir about how the ancient Greeks proved that gay people really just want to have sex with themselves. He proved it with philosophy. Or something! My brother is not an elfin hipster androgyne ten years my junior, but if he were I'd totally covet that ass.
These are comparisons that understandably rankle many gay people. In a letter to President Obama on Monday, Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights organization, said, “I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones.”
-NY Times Editorial
But, you know, seriously. The Human Rights Campaign is a timorous gang of desexualized, petit bourgeois, liberal ninnies whose very name is a cowardly euphemism. Denying that the growing general visibility of queer sexualities and the expanding legal recognition of same-sex relationships opens the door to the reevaluation of other sexual taboos plays well for the go-slow "allies" in the Donk party, but it is distinctly unrelated to the reality. If it is okay for two men or two women to have sex, why is it not okay for two related men or two related women? Why shouldn't uncles and nieces or aunts and nephews or cousins be permitted to marry or have sexual relations, especially non-procreative sexual relations? Why is it necessary to forcibly preclude polyandry and polygyny? I knew three gay men who lived in perfect happiness together for over two years--just as long as a lot of first marriages, and certainly longer than most gay couples ever make it.
The truth is that while the moralizing of the slippery-slope social conservatives is reactionary, silly, and hysterical, their point--that the growing permissibility of "alternate sexualities" does indeed force us to consider that many of our sexual prohibitions are just as arbitrary as those that, for instance, "define marriage as between one man and one woman"--is a good one.