While few things upset me more than to see another ultraliberal activist judge strike down marriage laws that have been in place, with the people's consent, for centuries, one silver lining is that conservative Republicans can use the issue to increase conservative turnout and get votes from culturally conservative Democrats (particularly black Democrats, who generally speaking are more socially conservative than white Democrats). In Maryland, conservative Republican Lt. Governor Michael Steele was already polling well with Democrats and in particular with blacks in the race for the U.S. Senate (Steele is black, and started to make inroads among black voters in 2002), but if he emphasizes the marriage issue he could make even greater strides.
It would be especially helpful if Steele demanded that the RAT candidates take a stand on the issue. If Democrat Congressman and Senate candidate Ben Cardin is forced to take a position in favor of a Federal Marriage Amendment, it might cause a collapse in his support among liberals in the RAT primary and throw the nomination to former Congressman Kweisi Mfume (there are so many RATs running that Mfume could win with less than 35% if Cardin loses support among white liberals). And if Cardin opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment, Steele can use the marriage issue to attract an unprecedented number of black votes and defeat Cardin. The MD Senate race promised to be a barnburner, but it may get even more interesting due to the tyrannical behavior by an activist judge.
The big question from an electoral point of view is--Can a Marriage Protection amendment be put on the ballot in Maryland and voted on in November of 2006?