Who or what you choose to indulge is entirely up to you.<quoted text>
Jeese! No stopping you on your monologue now!
You deny your revisionist law by never stopping your revisions. You're doing it again.
The first rule of interpretation of the law is legal precedent. There's years of legal precedent against your ideas, and you and your socialist friends work very hard to undo precedent, but that doesn't mean that there is any kind of public or legal discourse involved.
You're no better than the politicians who pull lunatic defenses of their actions out of their nether regions with things like "meaning of the word "is"". The courts are letting themselves turn into a cage of chimps. It doesn't mean that I'm going to indulge them.
It won't change centuries of preferential treatment for married couples.