Just listening to Rush about the same-sex marriage cases in front of the Supreme Court, esp. Prop 8, from here in California.

Rush had an excellent caller late in the show who talked about the pressure on his kids from the education system, and how indoctrination about gay marriage in schools often put a wedge between the children and their church. He pointed out that once gay marriage was deemed a "civil right", any church that did not perform gay marriages could be regarded as discriminatory, as bigoted as the Klan.

The caller then talked about the 1887 Edmunds-Tucker Act as a precedent for what could now occur to churches if gay marriage was deemed a civil right:

The act:

Disincorporated the LDS Church and the Perpetual Emigrating Fund Company, with assets to be used for public schools in the Territory.[1]
Required an anti-polygamy oath for prospective voters, jurors and public officials.
Annulled territorial laws allowing illegitimate children to inherit.
Required civil marriage licenses (to aid in the prosecution of polygamy).
Abrogated the common law spousal privilege for polygamists, thus requiring wives to testify against their husbands.[2]
Disfranchised women (who had been enfranchised by the Territorial legislature in 1870).
Replaced local judges (including the previously powerful Probate Court judges) with federally appointed judges.
Abolished the office of Territorial superintendent of district schools, granting the supreme court of the Territory of Utah the right to appoint a commissioner of schools. Also called for the prohibition of the use of sectarian books and for the collection of statistics of the number of so-called gentiles and Mormons attending and teaching in the schools.[3]

In 1890 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the seizure of Church property under the Edmunds–Tucker Act in Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States.

This act was repealed in 1978.[4][5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund...0%93Tucker_Act
I found myself wondering if something along these lines could take place again if gay marriage is, in fact, deemed a civil right. Thoughts?