[AntiGuv]

First, I wonder why Malcom Lazin would figure that this SC decision settles various questions once and for all, but that the Dale SC decision doesn't settle whether or not homosexuals can be in the BSA once and for all. It's the same set of justices, and the issues the questions raised and were decided on were quite different.

The reason is obvious: because those who would retain sodomy statutes know that the majority is against them, so they have to raise the spectre of gay marriage or gay scouts to drive their rhetoric..

Otherwise, had Lawrence been an Equal Protection ruling, then you would have a conflict with the Dale ruling as well as Don't Ask - Don't Tell. However, since this was a Due Process (right to privacy) ruling, there's no conflict with the latter.

If marriage becomes an issue before the Court, it will be on the basis of Full Faith and Credit, not on Due Process or Equal Protection (at least not anytime soon).

[MEGoody]

"The reason is obvious: because those who would retain sodomy statutes know that the majority is against them, so they have to raise the spectre of gay marriage or gay scouts to drive their rhetoric."

They aren't the only ones raising the 'spectre' of gay marriage and so forth. The gays were dancing in the streets yesterday (at least some of them) talking about how this was the first step in 'ending discriminiation.' The legal recognition of gay marriages was one of the 'spectres' they raised.