first appointment out that under the rational standard of review, that's flipping the question, the robeson case leaves this out very clearly, it points out that the question for rational basis review is whether the state interest that's being put forward is if it's being advanced by including a first group, or including a second group that does not advance that interest is not irrational, does not extend benefits, so that case again was about veteran's benefits, the question is state -- is having people to fight in the armed services and the benefits are extended to benefits and encouraged people to join the military, and the question was through conscientious objectors, are they entitled to these benefits and that would not advance the state's interest in making it more likely for people to fight in the nation's services. >> so you would say that what we're trying to do confining marriage to opposite sex partners is to encourage procreation? >> i think that is one of the state's interests is making sure that procreation, for one, occurs in long-term committed relationships between opposit

i have to point out that under the rational standard of review, that's flipping the question, the robeson case leaves this out very clearly by the united states supreme court where it points out that the question for rational basis review is whether the state interest that's being put forward is if it's being advanced by including a first group or including a second group that does not advance that interest is not irrational, it does not extend benefits, so that case again was about veterans' benefits, the question the state interest asserted is having people to fight in the armed services and the benefits are extended to benefits and encouraged people to join the military, and the question was through conscientious objectors are they entitled to these benefits and the question -- extending veterans' benefits to objectors would not advance the state's interest in making it more likely for people to fight in the nation's services. >> so you would say that what we're trying to do, confining marriage to opposite sex partners, is to encourage procreation? >> i think that is one of the state's