"Marriage is defined as a union between One Man and One Woman"

Well, I have an interesting concept, how do you define man and woman?

If you apply sexual organs, then what if the guy lost his balls due to an accident? What if the woman is infertile due to a genetic condition? Would they still be denied the right to marry base on this law? Get the lawyers on the case and we can have some fun if the proponents try to argue against a woman, who has lost her ability to reproduce, from marrying due to the definition of this law.

So, sexual organs cannot work. Then, why don't we apply a hormonal expression defining man and woman? If that is done, we basically have won the battle. There are trace amounts of Estrogen and Testosterone in both men and women, which varies to degrees on their organic chemistry. If we apply this principle, there is no way to define "a man and woman" without excluding a good proportion of heterosexuals from marriage as well.

Anyone think my crazy idea has merit and any lawyers out there want to try this out?

We can play a game of legal definitions to make the proposition impossible to uphold due to defining elements within the framework of human sexual identity.