Unless there's more to it that I'm missing, that "article" was a whole two sentences:

A proposal making its way through Tennesssee state legislature would establish a common-law marriage between “one man” and “one woman.” However, opponents of the bill say it would eliminate an age requirement, and in some instances, open the door for a coverup of child sex abuse.

Anyway, here's the bill they're (apparently) talking about. Sometimes I think it's deliberately left out of the articles because they don't want you to read it for yourself.

Edit: Here's the "Summary," establishing marriage as being between one man and one woman.

Edit Edit: Ohhh, I get it now. They're saying by not explicitly defining ages in the definition of "marriage," they are allowing people to circumvent any consent laws. So now they're back to explicitly defining "woman" and "man" again.

Are there any biologists in the house? Because when I read "between one MAN and one WOMAN" I was certainly not picturing a couple of junior-high school students.