If I were going to try, I'd probably try to draw an parallel between the doll experiment used in the Brown trial and the suicide statistics for LGBT youth today. But I doubt that would be enough by itself. I wouldn't be surprised if the opposing attorney could counter with similar statistics resulting from discrimination against women at some point in history. They'd merely have to argue that, even if LGBT discrimination is bad, it is not historically worse than other forms of sexual discrimination; and then add that LGBT issues are more similar in quality to sexual issues than racial ones.

I wasn't a fan at all of the argument Windsor's lawyer made, which sounded to me like, "Homosexuals are more equally able to contribute to society than women." That's got all sorts of logical problems on top of potentially offending the judges. But at the same time, while I'd love to get suspect scrutiny (if it could be done justly), I'm not sure how best to argue it.