

   What *exactly* does the American Constitution say about "the right 
to association" ? 
   Homosexuals, whether Clayton likes it or not, are as much members
of society as he is. As such they have the right to participate and
have an equal opportunity to pursue their goals.
   No-one is saying that Clayton should be forced to associate with
queerfolk in his private life (one suspects the gays in question would
object also 8-) ), but by proclaiming the general right not to associate
with them in the *public* sphere (which includes housing, hiring, etc),
he's giving his right to non-association priority over their rights to
equal access to opportunity.
   Historically, people can associate publically with disliked groups
with very little ill-effect, however cutting a group off from normal
commerce has a severe impact on their lives.
   Clayton, why exactly should your "right" to non-association in the
public sphere take priority over homosexual's rights to equal opportunity ?
