The arrival of a new set of arguments about gay marriage. President Bush is asking Congress to go forward with a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. What should we make of this? How upset should those who accept or approve of gay marriage actually be? Is the cause better off fighting in the courts or fending off a constitutional amendment? Arguably, it is better to be in the position of fending off a constitutional amendment. The amendment will surely, eventually, be defeated, because of the difficulty of amending the constitution. (All that is needed is the opposition of one house of the legislature in thirteen states.)

Meanwhile, proponents of gay marriage will be able to talk about the importance of refraining from adding a statement of exclusion toward a discriminated-against group our to our revered Constitution, which thus far has been amended only to increase equality. The arrival of this new set of arguments will coincide with the departure of arguments about overreaching activist judges thwarting democratic choice.