I don't see it that way. If would could have done it a decade ago, we WOULD have. But the sole libertarian argument against it at that time was that "we don't need such a radical solution until the situation calls for an exigent enactment." Now that we need it, and the situation IS exigent now, those same naysayers seem to be nowhere around.
Now? We don't have the states to ratify such an Amendment even if by some miracle we could get it through Congress.
I think you'd be surprised at the support for such an amendment, especially with the numerous stories being reported of the vicious bullying by homosexuals of private businesses and individuals over religious and personal objection to this contrivance. A recently conducted poll showed that somewhere over 85% of Americans thought that private business SHOULD NOT be forced to violate their religious beliefs regarding real marriage. If this issue were properly tied to the marriage redefinition push, you can bet that we'd see at least a 15% return to support for real marriage.
That's dead and done. Not going to happen. We need to focus on carving out all the protections and exemptions we can.
Protections and exemptions are just as likely to be passed as an Amendment. If you haven't noticed, almost NONE of the recent pushes for redefining marriage in states offer ANY protections for businesses or religious objectors as they did only a couple of years ago. New York was the last one (adding these "protections" was critical to the bill's passage,) and those "protections" were tenuous at best, as they were constructed to be severable at the whim of a court.
Besides, the lawlessness that is rampant now will not respect any puny "religious exemptions" anymore than they respect state constitutions and DOMA's, which they are running rough-shod over.