Originally Posted by Prison Bitch
I'm not sure. Ask them and I'm sure they'll tell you. We do know one fact: it's the "null hypothesis". If you want to change something, it's up to you to make the case for change. The status quo doesn't owe any explanation. Either gays will make their case or they won't, but the traditionalists really don't have any burden of proof here whatsoever.
It works the other way for conservatives too. In 1935 social security was won by the progressives. Now, it's the null. It is incumbent on Paul Ryan et al to prove their case to change it.
I haven't heard a good explanation yet as to what a heterosexual couple gets out of marriage that homosexual couples shouldn't be entitled to. I understand what you mean about the "null hypothesis." Significant change should require sound reasoning. I think the reasoning is pretty clear, and the change is already happening in some states. I think that might be what is spurring the SC to weigh in.