Well, you’re asking me two different — and two highly inconvenient — questions. The first is, What would I have politicians do? The second, is what do I think should be done. As for the politicians, the answer is easier. Be honest. Dean and Kerry both pay lipservice to being against gay marriage but they are clearly delighted that the courts are running with this issue and they have nary a word of criticism for the activist judges responsible. If they had more integrity on the issue they would at least criticize the judges who are trying to do by judicial fiat what they oppose as a matter of law and policy. I would certainly be impressed with Kerry & Co. if they were willing to actually fight for what they say they believe, one way or the other.

As for me, you know I’ve wrestled with this. Intellectually, I don’t have a problem with saying that judges who make up the law should be impeached. If they’re elected, they should be recalled or thrown out of office. But I know that on a practical level that’s not all that helpful. Neither is launching a public campaign to solve this problem through the state legislatures. Though certainly Kerry & Co. could say some things on that front too. My public policy solution, “civil unions si, marriage no” is only a political solution if politicians show some leadership on the issue — which means first and foremost taking a stance against gay marriage if that’s actually you’re position. My objection to the FMA was never based upon the substance of the policy it represents (depending on which FMA we’re talking about of course), but on my reluctance to make this a constitutional issue rather than a state issue. Regardless, at the end of the day, since nobody seems to be listening to me, what else I would do doesn’t seem to matter. But I’ll keep pondering anyway.