I echo all of Jon Rauch's points here about Maggie Gallagher's latest attack on gay couples' right to legally protected relationships. There sometimes is a real clash between liberal anti-discrimination 
legislation and maximal religious freedom. Given the choice, I'm with maximal freedom for religious groups to discriminate in any way they like as private entities; and I'm generally suspicious of anti-discrimination laws. (Dale Carpenter makes the case for allowing the Catholic hierarchy to discriminate here.) That's why, in Virtually Normal, I opposed laws against anti-gay discrimination in employment; and why I oppose all hate crime laws; and why I firmly support the rights of bigots to express themselves without being restrained or "re-educated" by government. But the marriage argument is still largely a red herring here. Religious freedom is affected primarily by broad anti-discrimination laws, and has been for years. Gallagher wants to give the impression that marriage rights have created this clash. That's untrue, and she knows it.
This article available online at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2006/05/rauch-on-gallagher/235245/
