On his blog. Frum's blog. On NRO.
Opponents of the Federal Marriage Amendment suggest – or insinuate – that without it, conservative states will be left alone to define marriage as they wish. This promise will be a short-lived one. Once 10 or 12 or 14 states have submitted to liberal local judges and accepted same-sex marriage, the federalist position now championed by the New York Times will be discarded. Today, federalists are the progressive heroes of the hour. Tomorrow, they will be condemned as black-hearted reactionaries. The forces of progress will demand that Illinois, Georgia, Arizona and the rest fall into line behind Massachusetts – and those who wish to defend marriage as it was will discover that they have no tools left with which to protect themselves.On marriage, the United States will remain all one way – or else go all the other. Those who vote against the Federal Marriage Amendment are not voting for local rights. They are voting for a national policy of same-sex marriage – a policy that will be pressed upon this country sooner than almost anyone now expects.
"Will be pressed upon this country"? It's being pressed right now. The Defense of Marriage Act is already being challenged in a federal court in south Florida.
This states rights position is one of the most cynical ploys I've ever witnessed by the libs....it makes me want to tear up my copy of the constitution.............yeah let's have states rights on abortion, prayer in school, et.al.