I've had the ...uh, 'pleasure' (for want of a better word) or observing this woman operate very closely,
...and lets say lesbian is not the word I'd use to describe her, ...'ambitious opportunist' is more appropriate IMO
Others may have a decidely less diplomatic term for her.
Perhaps, that's the case. Regardless, any lesbianism (actual or perceived, past or present) had no bearing on her getting a marriage license. She showed up with a man and got one.
Again, it's about changing the very definition of marriage itself. Basically, it's a union between a man and woman. Even within that framework, there are limiting factors: age, family relations, number of participants.
If gays have the right to have their preferences met, shouldn't those who like kids (say under 13) be able to have theirs met, as well. What about those who dig close relatives? What if first/second cousins simply isn't close enough? Don't those folks have the "right" to have marriage changed to accomodate them?
And, why is just two people? That's a question some polygamists are asking now. If gays can have the rules changed, then they can, too.