Bill Kristol has come out for the Federal Marriage Amendment:
Homosexual marriage is not a “wedge issue” being pushed for electoral purposes by Republicans. Indeed, the political advantage is not entirely clear. If activists convince the media to paint the Federal Marriage Amendment as prejudice against homosexuals, and if Democratic candidates are allowed to dodge the issue, Republicans could find themselves injured by the fight during the fall election.
But what choice is there? We have a national issue now, forced upon us by the judicial will of the Massachusetts high court. In the absence of a national reply, the activists will simply keep pushing–as proved by San Francisco’s illegal granting of marriage licenses to homosexuals last week, solely to create cases to take to court. This issue must come before the people themselves, and when courts cast their political preferences as constitutional law, only a constitutional amendment can answer them.
I have a question for those smarter than me on this subject.
In three months, when Massachusetts has to start marrying people, won’t the debate get more complex when me must start grandfathering in, or pulling away marriage licenses to homosexual couples — not that I have a problem with that, but I’m sure some will — which is probably why the Mass. Supreme Court is rushing forward.