You're kinda all over the place here; you seem to be conflating a general anti-LGBT bigotry or hatred with the successful Prop. 8 push.
Prop. 8 was strictly about gay marriage. It was not about devaluing any member of society. In fact, Prop. 8 elevated or lauded principles once held to be sacrosanct and incontrovertible.
So I'm confused here, because you seem to be pitting Christian denominations against each other when you state the more-so "laid back" groups, like the Quakers, etc. and obliquely attack the Mormons, and the Catholics, the Four Square people, the Jehovah Witnesses, the Southern Baptists, etc...
I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish in this diary.
Privileges afforded by a contract are just those, privileges.
When state courts and legislatures decide to open those privileges to same-sex couples willy-nilly on the basis of conferring "rights," then they're not practicing good jurisprudence, they're just kow-towing to a special interest group.
It would be better in my mind if courts and legislatures just said, instead of hiding behind the Constitution as a basis of conferring "rights," if they just said, "We are afraid of looking like bigots. We are afraid of gay people, and we are afraid that we may get voted out of office."
If they said that, that would be a more compelling argument than the faux-jurisprudential nonsense that's spewing out of the Northeast right now.
You'd have to think the floor for a Generic (R) in PA is 40% (a la Rick Santorum in 2006), and the floor for a Generic (D) is 45% because of the partisan shift.
With Specter in the GE as an (I), you'd have to figure he'd get at least 35% of the vote, with 35% of the vote for the (D), and 30% of the vote for the (R). That's too close for comfort. He'd probably lose in a squeaker.
I don't think Specter has the energy in him to hustle like Lieberman did in 2006 and win as an (I).