Think these defense of marriage acts make things simple?
No. “Oh,” they say, “Let’s just define marriage as being between a man and a woman only. That will make life easy and wonderful!” Well, wonderful (ly stupid) and all that, but you know, in the real world, these issues aren’t so clear cut.
Let’s start with a big one. How are you going to define what’s a man and what’s a woman? Genetic testing? Usually this is cut and dried, but some men are XX and some women are XY. While such people are rare, in a large population (say, the US) we could have hundreds or thousands of individuals whose genetics don’t match their sex.
So when genetics doesn’t work, are you going to look at anatomy? Then what of intersexed people, who are not exclusively male or female? Do they not get to marry at all? This is to say nothing of transgendered individuals — which counts? Preop or postop?
In our hurry to defend “traditions” (which I suspect are not as traditional as everyone believes), why set ourselves up for more problems? If you want do defend marriage, I’d think you’d want to encourage more marriage, not less.