Oh fine... just state the obvious :p

Okay, so if you pay for costumed characters, do you get Mickey and Minnie, or Chip and Dale?

OR bRER bEAR.........

I agree. It's a company folks. They're there to make money. I'm sure this move was do to the potential law suit someone was stricking up. It's a win-win for Disney. They get more money and look good doing it plus no one sues them! BONUS!!

yup. right up until you get the 'catering to sinners' groups threatening boycott.

a win-win even though you cant win-win them all. :rolleyes:
kudos to big D for taking the high road.
(and if they can make a buck at it...so much the better)

Um, how can you sue Disney for not allowing illegal marriages? Pulease, that one's a non-starter .... and I know lawsuits.

Well I'm suing Disney for not letting me appear in my traditional Vaginismus garb at their parks. Unwashed heathens.

Does Disney sell a marriage or pomp surrounding a marriage? What evidence of a legally binding marriage license have they previously required? I honestly don't know how that worked (at some point in the process did you have to show Disney the license to continue with the package)?

If it is just a service offered without requirement of the government endorsement then I would think that ability to sue for denial of the service would fall to the question of whether homosexuals are a protected class. Disney certainly wouldn't be able to deny a non-governmental service (which the ceremony is) on the basis of race.

Not that I think such a lawsuit would have much chance.

You have to show them a valid marriage license to even have a wedding on their property ... not even of the Fairy Tale (or potentially Fairy) variety.

Then yeah, you could hardly complain.

But if that will no longer be the case I wonder who will start complaining now.