Tribe's article (good find, by the way) says this: "... for the Constitution delegates to the United States no power to create categorical exceptions to the Full Faith and Credit Clause." I find it disturbing to agree with Tribe on anything, but I think he's got that right. That is, being married in one state means being married in all (just as a Reno divorce was a divorce in all states). Anyway, we can't decide this issue here. It will have to play itself out in realtime, first with a state legalizing gay marriage, then with another state refusing to recognize it, then into the courts and up the chain of appeals. I predict that Dred Scott will be cited in the final decision, as loathesome as it may be to invoke it, but it's good authority for the nation-wide recognition of an unpopular status created in one state.
This subject is off-topic for this thread, so I suggest we let it drop. There must be gay marriage threads where this issue can play out in all its glory, and such would be the appropraite forum to continue this conversation. (Actually, I don't care about the issue all that much, and I probably wouldn't participate in such a thread.)
Placemarker.