Conservative skepticism about the Wisconsin gay marriage amendment.

Conservative radio commentator Charlie Sykes is skeptical about the gay marriage amendment:

[M]arriage will be redefined either through evolutionary or revolutionary means. Society will either gradually change its attitiudes in response to the sorts of relationships that develop in its midst, or the change will be rammed down its throat by court order or government dictat.

Does the amendment – which seeks to avoid a judicial mandate – itself veer too far in the opposite direction, by freezing both social and legal policy and removing it from the give and take of legislative compromise and social evolution?...

Exactly how does allowing gays to enter into legal, monogamous relationships undermine the institution of marriage? Isn’t in society’s interest to foster and recognize such stable relationships? And why would that be something that conservatives would oppose?...

Gays who wish to marry don’t want to tear down marriage. They want in on it.

Sykes cautions advocates on both sides of the question not to be so extreme, lest they alienate voters. [ADDED: I've also written many times -- like here -- that I think gay marriage advocates ought to be more patient with people who don't agree with them.] I've already said that I think the amendment as written is alienating to centrists. Wouldn't it be nice if the political debate on the amendment, instead of stirring up hostility, brought us into civil, rational conversations with each other?

Sykes collects the responses of other Wisconsin bloggers here.