The author of the gay marriage article seems a bit dense. It's a nice analogy, the trademark argument, but it's not a refutation.

In fact, tarnishment is exactly what Henry Hyde was asserting, and it is precisely because hetero marriage is sacred and gay marriage is profane - just ask Leviticus.

So the tarnishment concept acts to allow Christians to operate, as they often do, in code, so that they can put their desired policies into effect in the political realm without being accused of encoding religion into our laws.

Just like "local control" in environmental politics is code for "man's dominion over the earth," and defense of Israel is code for "bring on the end times," "diminishment" of marriage is Christian Code for "those gays are all blasphemous, filthy b---f------rs."

So just exactly how is our author going to refute that?