I think this is a very important issue. I am currently researching this issue in preparation for presenting at a symposium at Florida Coastal Law School in March, and writing a law review article this summer. The question in my mind, from a legal point of view, is how to respond to the argument that race and sexual orientation are not equivalent from a legal standpoint. The Supreme Court's jurisprudence does address them differently, though perhaps it shouldn't, but tell that to the Supreme Court. Also, the Court's freedom of expression and association doctrines permitted discrimination against gays in the NYC St. Patrick's Day case and the Boy Scouts case. So how does one argue persuasively that the law cannot permit discrimination against gays, when the Supreme Court has said it does in those two situations. Other than the non-legal argument of "it's not fair?", which would go nowhere in front of the Supremes.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
