That was a very eloquent article, and if Ted Olsen can be that eloquent in court, he might just carry the day. He made a number of good points, any one of which seemed sufficient to me, especially the sheer irrationality of discriminating against gays and lesbians in marriage law, and how the religious opposition to gay marriage inevitably makes attempting to ban it a matter of religious persecution. It's like traditional Catholics voting to ban serving meat on Fridays to anyone, regardless of religion. You just can't do that in America.

But he mentioned then glossed over a serious hitch in all this, the perception that marriage is a religious sacrament. If that's the case, we have whole other problem, with the government violating the separation of church and state by, effectively, performing a religious ceremony. Oops. Seems to me that the perfect long-term solution is to get the government out of the marriage business entirely, leaving the religious ceremonies to religious institutions; and instead, just operate a domestic registry to register relationships as other kinds of contracts are registered, for legal purposes. I love the irony of making everyone have a "domestic partnership arrangement" just like gays and lesbians do now. It's a clean solution, I think.