We're political scientists here, who are taught to think about individuals' stories as an "n of one." But for what it's worth, here's an "n" of one.
I walked to the store last week with a neighbor of mine who is gay and lives with his long-term partner. We talked about how he was looking for a summer place, and was a turned off of Provincetown because he just didn't want to keep up with the twenty-something gay party-boys any more. He then went on to observe that he was about to retire from the government, and was thinking of what to do next. Initially, he observed, he thought he would spend a few months as a "house husband." Something about this last observation really hit home with me. What possible social purpose is there for preventing a man like this, whose lifestyle is indistinguishable from mine (except, perhaps, from being even more bourgeois than mine!) from formalizing his marriage. While I think the MA court erred in making this decision itself, I do think that it is simple justice that he is now able to be married. Can anyone give me a good reason why the legislatures (again, setting aside the issue of the role of courts) of the other 49 states shouldn't allow people like him to be married?