[highball]

Civil divorce and remarriage wasn’t framed as a civil right. ‘Gay marriage’ is. I don’t think it is beyond the pale today, in my opinion. And it would be punishing them for not doing it, not forcing them to, because they wouldn’t no matter what the state said about it.

Still don't see it. There's no precedent for it, and plenty of churches will be willing to marry them. I understand the concern, but don't see that coming at all.

In any case, what about renting halls to gay couples who declare themselves married? Or businesses who don’t buy into whatever impossibility the state is calling marriage at the time?

Ah, that's a horse of a different color. That's a very real concern, that anyone who sells directly to, or contracts directly with, the public will have to accommodate gay couples.

I'm afraid that fight has already been lost. It was lost decades ago, when we as a country decided that punishing bigots for being stupid was more important than the rights of private property owners.

[Ransomed]

I reckon we’ll see, hope you are right. But 30 years ago folks would have called you nuts if you would have told them that in 2013 13 states would recognize something called ‘gay marriage.’

Freegards