Just like Southern states couldn't be trusted to create schools that are separate but still truly equal. Hypothetically, it would work. But in practice, it depends far too much on the continued support of people who would rather we didn't have "garriage," or whatever we would call it. It wouldn't be long before someone would introduce a law that benefits married couples but makes no mentioned of garried couples, or that is a detriment to garried couples but not to married couples.

Whereas, if SCOTUS forces states to allow gay marriage, y'all could continue to call it whatever you want, personally and in your religions, while we in turn could be secure in the knowledge that, as far as laws are concerned, it really is no different from marriage and no future laws could forget that.

That's not to say I wouldn't roll my eyes at a preacher who calls it "garriage" when referring to homosexuals, but I certainly wouldn't try to rally the troops to make him change his tune. I'd just go to a different church. I don't have to agree with the preacher feel secure that the law will treat us, our spouses, and our children all equally, and vice versa. Just because we disagree with you and want to be treated equally doesn't mean we are trying to take away your right to freedom of religion.

(For that matter, where did this whole notion come from, that gay couples are going to be forcing churches to host their weddings and preachers to perform the ceremonies? Why in the world would anybody want their happiest day to be held under the spell of a church and preacher that are contemptuous of everything the day means to the couple?)