[Torie]

I don't know your stand, but here is my stand, which is in the I don't know column. I call them as I see them and sometimes my call, is "undecided." I see no real need to make a rush to judgment on a Hobson's choice matter. I posted it to jwaslsh07 elsewhere.

"I still think an amendment giving Congress the power to resolve this matter is best. But nobody listens to me. I dislike the idea of an amendment that precludes a majority from deciding the issue, one way or the other. And it is a federal issue of course, it has to be, for reasons which we both know. Now I have to weigh an amendment that trumps the rogue courts (or indeed rogue state legislatures), but also trumps my "right" to have the majority agree with me some day. Those are two trumps cards that when played together cause me cognitive dissonance.

[Sabertooth]

"I still think an amendment giving Congress the power to resolve this matter is best. But nobody listens to me. I dislike the idea of an amendment that precludes a majority from deciding the issue, one way or the other."

Well, it precludes an Orwellian majority. Marriage already has meaning, and a definition.

What is the sense of empowering the majority with the ability to vote that fish are frogs or cats are dogs?

"And it is a federal issue of course, it has to be, for reasons which we both know. Now I have to weigh an amendment that trumps the rogue courts (or indeed rogue state legislatures), but also trumps my "right" to have the majority agree with me some day. Those are two trumps cards that when played together cause me cognitive dissonance.

The CMA is a dirty fix to the immediate symptom of the rogue judiciary.

We just don't have time for the necessary impeachments.