In Oregon, Measure 36 on this year's ballot adds the following to the Oregon state constitution:
It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage.
This is clearly backlash against the same-sex marriages in Multnomah County back in March, as well as more generally against Massachusetts and San Francisco and so on. Depressing, but unfortunately not all that unusual these days; other states are doing similar things.
However, in Oregon something unusual has happened. Anyone who pays the $500 fee can have their argument in favor of or opposed to a ballot measure included in the voters' pamphlet. So an editor and church organist from Portland, M. Dennis Moore, submitted four "arguments in favor" that are actually satirical attacks on the measure. And three of them are at the top of the list of arguments in favor on the website (and presumably at the top of the list in the voters' pamphlet as well, though I'm not certain of that).
I have some concerns about this approach. Primarily because it can just as easily be used in the other direction; it would have been just as easy for someone to have sent in a satirical argument supposedly opposing the measure but really making an argument for it. (Though I should note that this is not the first time someone's done this in Oregon.) But also because the satire is kinda scattershot—he doesn't take one point and make it consistently throughout a given argument, he sorta tosses in irrelevant asides here and there. (And I should know, being an expert at tossing in irrelevant asides.) And from what I've read, there are standard answers to some of his Biblical arguments.
But they're not meant to be rational arguments; they're satire. And they're kinda funny. "Marriage is for procreation. If you're not pro-Creation, you're anti-God. And once a marriage has been solemnized, sex is serious business." (Emphasis his.) And so on. I'm particularly amused by some of his fake organization names, like the "Traditional Prejudices Coalition" and the "Defense of Heterosexual Breeding Coalition." (Which points to heterosexualbreeding.com, which isn't exactly work-safe in that it includes derogatory language, in big letters, that isn't obviously satirical at first glance.)
For a few more details, see an AP article about the matter.