Think the SCOTUS opening prayer ruling is no big deal?

[progree]

15. Here's their tie-in to marriage, from the document citied in the OP:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/222431634/12-17668-201
In upholding the town’s practice of beginning town council meetings with prayer, the Court made several statements indicating that the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, made applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, should not be interpreted in a way that renders invalid a practice like prayer in public meetings that was well established at the time the First and Fourteenth Amendments were adopted. For example, referring to the Court’s earlier decision in Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983), the Court said:

Marsh stands for the proposition that it is not necessary to define the precise boundary of the Establishment Clause where history shows that the specific practice is permitted. Any test the Court adopts must acknowledge a practice that was accepted by the Framers and has withstood the critical scrutiny of time and political change.

So too here: Any “test the Court adopts” for determining Fourteenth Amendment limitations on a State’s authority to define marriage ought likewise respect “a practice”— namely, the man-woman definition of marriage that was universally “accepted by the Framers” of the Fourteenth Amendment.

(All bold-faced emphasis added by me.) Back to the 19th Century.

Marsh v. Chambers, by the way is the 1983 Supreme Court decision allowing prayers at the beginning of legislative sessions, and taxpayer-funded chaplains. (a case brought regarding the Nebraska legislature). Dial-up warning: