In our discussion as to whether or not women should receive the vote, we have generally agreed that, really, a vote is not to the man but to the marriage. And doubling the number of votes per marriage creates one primary effect only: accounting difficulties and opportunities for abuse at the ballot box. Besides, save in the rare case where a husband and wife might cancel each other's vote, the only true change to results will be the doubling of votes needed to be counted. A reasonable counterargument to these simple facts has yet to be made.
Intrasex marriage would throw this one-vote-per-marriage system, which has served our nation so well these many generations, upon its end (if you'll excuse the expression). In the case of men marrying, those marriages will receive a disproportional allotment of representation in our system of governance, while sapphic marriages will be utterly unrepresented. The former issue is unjust to Americans generally and the latter is unjust to the ladies themselves. In either case, it is clear that marriage of those intrasexually inclined will result in violations of the most basic liberties we as Americans hold dear.
Protect duly elected representation!
Oppose legally sanctioned intrasexual marital relationships!