[WhoisAlanGreenspan?]

I heard of a couple of friends who are both retired with excellent pensions considering marriage as a (newly) legal way to allow either to inherit the others pension. This was on the radio, I don't know these people.

I think it would be interesting to see other ideas of the unintended consequences this ruling could cause. Maybe that could be way #4. Beat the political class at their own game, redefining redefining to the point that nobody cares what they say anymore.

[Adder]

Sure: the SCOTUS has decreed there is a right to marry. Therefore you cannot legally prevent anyone from doing so. Polygamy? On what grounds do you stop it?
Can a group of people form a marriage co-op? Do not see why not.
It doesn’t have to be based on sex. It could be monetary. A father could marry his son so as to avoid inheritance taxes. The son gets spousal benefits.

Marriage has no meaning. It was destroyed by the few words of heathens.