Judge Kramer's Decision: A Rational Post

This post from Another Gay Republican makes more sense than anything I've seen, heard or read about the decision in California, especially this:

Yes, we're being discriminated against, and yes, that's wrong. But by going to the courts on constitutional grounds as a first resort, we give our opponents no other choice but to use constitutional amendments as their only defense to our wins. We open with a "game-over" argument, and they respond with their own. The problem is that their "game-over" argument is the one the majority of Americans agree with.

For every win in a Massachusetts, we're going to get a loss in an Ohio, a Michigan, and an Oregon. And for each of those losses, we're going to have to go in and overturn a constitutional amendment, starting at a weaker position than we were before.

So, like the California Log Cabin Republicans suggest, we have to go to the legislatures and the people, educating them and appealing to their good will. It's the only way we will secure our right to marry in every state.

He's right. If gays want to redefine marriage, then convince a majority that's it makes sense. Trying to do it through a judge, even a Republican one, smacks of Judicial tyranny. And that is becoming more and more the battle cry of Conservatives across the country.

Thanks to Devil's Advocate for this post. There is much more on this decision on his site.