Marriage, asserted the Centre in its affidavit opposing same-sex marriage last week, is a socially sanctioned union of two individuals governed either by uncodified personal laws or codified statutory laws. But, but-not just two individuals actually. Only a biological man and a biological woman. Finally, as if exasperated by the jalebi forming in the saat phere of circular logics-judicial interference will cause “complete havoc with the delicate balance of personal laws” (yaniki change is too much trouble for those that benefit from the status quo) because “marriage isn’t just a private decision, but also has a public aspect as several statutory rights and obligations are connected with it”. Yaniki, many laws will need to change to reflect reality (see point on status quo above).

No reasonable person is confused here. If marriage is a thing people do, then every citizen should be able to do it. If marriage is the only way to ensure inheritance of property (or debts) then everyone deserves it, especially those with property. If marriage is the way to have one’s relationships recognised, and respected, then surely all should be able to marry. If diversity is about being included in the status quo, then everyone should be part of it. Wait, what?