Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., accused Kurtz of adopting the elementary statistical fallacy of confusing correlation with cause and effect. "You show no causality whatsoever," Nadler said, adding that he may attempt to amend the Federal Marriage Amendment, assuming it comes to the floor, with prohibitions on divorce, birth control, adultery, female employment and other social trends believed to undermine traditional marriage. Kurtz replied that he can't prove causation but is making a systematic argument, and there is no better explanation for the sudden doubling in the out-of-wedlock birthrate in the Netherlands. To disprove him, he said, same- sex marriage advocates would have to come up with a better explanation. Rep. Robert Scott, D-Va., asked Kurtz several times if what he was arguing was that heterosexual couples will not marry if homosexual couples do. "Are you saying that men and women are less likely to get married because two men get married?" When Kurtz said yes, Scott laughed.

The last time I went on an actual date was my senior year in high school. The guy picked me up at my house and we got something to eat, then played pool. His treat. So, if college students aren't dating, what are they doing? ''One-night stands, hookups," said Heather Zguro, a 20-year-old sophomore from Westfield who attends Salem State. ''Half of the people here don't date." Zguro and others say the majority of students aren't meeting people with the intent of starting a relationship. They'd rather just hang out with friends at parties, bars, and school events. Based on the 2001 report ''Hooking Up, Hanging Out, and Hoping for Mr. Right: College Women on Mating and Dating Today," conducted by the Institute for American Values, Zguro's remarks aren't as far-fetched as one might think.

Massachusetts could not reserve marriage for opposite-sex couples, Marshall wrote, because the state had no rational reason for doing so. In Goodridge, the best argument in defense of Massachusetts' marriage laws offered by lawyers for the state was that male-female unions provide the optimal setting for child rearing. In response, Marshall pointed out that the state had long allowed gay couples to adopt.

What she didn't point out were some less helpful facts, like the lack of evidence in the trial record or anywhere else about how children raised by same-sex parents fare. The few small studies that have been done are inconclusive. Normally, that dearth of data would be good enough reason to uphold the state's centuries-old marriage laws, since it's the plaintiffs' burden to prove that there is no plausible reason to uphold the status quo. In cases like Goodridge that challenge a state law as lacking a rational basis, courts are supposed to give states lots of leeway for justifying their practices.

Or are they? . . . .

Reaction to the club has been particularly visceral, critics said, because its membership requirements highlight a controversy in the black community, the swelling number of single black women. According to federal Census data, only 29.2 percent of black women are married and living with spouses, compared with 54.3 percent of white women.
...
Debra Dickerson, the author of "The End of Blackness," a discussion of racism and stereotypes, said Mr. Lopez-Pierre was profiting from the misery of others. "There is a real problem in the state of black love, but it is not to be solved by putting women on the beauty pageant auction block," said Ms. Dickerson, who says she is an educated black woman who has never had luck with black men. "I'd have more respect for him if he would just admit that that he was an entrepreneur looking for a heartless way to make money. But it's not just capitalist, it's misogynist and sexist."

"I didn't marry my wife because she was a kind, sensitive woman," he said. "I married her because she is a complete package. I married her because she takes her butt to the gym, and she keeps it tight for me. I want it all, and I got it all. There are men who want the same."

Couples would have to undergo 12 hours of premarital counseling or face longer waits for a marriage license under a bill approved Tuesday by the Iowa Senate and sent to the governor. The bill, which passed 33-14, would set a waiting period of three days with counseling and 20 days without it. The bill's supporters say it's a way to help strengthen marriages and slow the divorce rate.

Many gay-marriage advocates claim that same-sex marriage should remain a local issue. They argue that once one state recognizes gay marriage, there is little danger that the Constitution's full-faith-and-credit clause will compel other states to follow suit. But this is little more than the signature debating trick of our time: trying to advance one's own effort to enforce national standards in the guise of a modest localism.

Get the government out of the business of "marriage" and have "civil unions" for all. That is the gist of a new proposal that could resolve the raucous debate over gay marriage, according to Paul Loscocco, a Massachusetts state representative who is presenting the idea to colleagues.