Surveying the Republican response to the Supreme Court’s gay marriage ruling, there is broad agreement on at least two items — protecting religious liberty and — to use Senator Rubio’s words –nominating “judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood.” I agree, but how many of the candidates truly mean what they say? We’ve seen recent examples where the commitment to religious liberty lasted only until Apple, Salesforce.com, and Wal-Mart exercised their corporate veto. We’ve experienced almost three decades since Robert Bork’s nomination when the Left gets everything it wants in a Supreme Court justice, while the Right nominates individuals with just the right amount of vagueness in their judicial philosophy — then crosses its fingers and hopes for an Alito and not a Souter.

When fighting against cultural headwinds, the key (and, yes, this is easier said than done) is persuasive courage. It’s not going to be enough to merely rally the troops. The conservative movement at all levels — including through conservative members of the GOP — is going to have re-introduce religious liberty to the American public. The GOP will have to fight for the same liberty in selecting judges that it has granted the Left. It is hard to believe, for example, that less than six years after the Left defeated Judge Bork’s nomination, the Senate confirmed Justice Ginsburg by a vote of 96 to 3. But while some political tasks are difficult, many political decisions are not. The next elected Republican to reverse course on life or liberty because of corporate pressure should pay with his or her job.