That's not really an argument. Going "I don't think that it should be done on that basis" isn't actually offering a counter to any of the points I've made, it's just saying "I disagree because I disagree".The point was that the argument would be that the Court should not be deciding the case in terms of gender but rather orientation.
It is UNQUESTIONABLE that the law discriminates on the basis of gender. It is unquestionable that the law allows a man to do something a woman can't do, and allows a woman to do something a man can't do. So the question is whether or not there is an argument that such discrimination is substantially related to an important state interest. Going "Well, I don't think it should be judged on that factor" isn't actually an argument against anything I'm saying nor counters my earlier claim that I personally have not seen a legitimate argument justifying the discrimination based on gender....rather, it's simply an attempt to ignore the issue.