Amendment Update - On Friday, the WaPo had a good summary of where the movement for the FMA stands right now -- capping a week when the amendment was first introduced in the Senate. The good news: the proponents are divided, and it all comes down to this troubling question of whether the amendment should abolish legislatively enacted civil unions. The hard-core anti-gay bigots (ironically nicknamed the "Arlington Group") want to go all the way, but their more practical allies think that would be politically infeasible. I hope that's true, but obviously any dissension in their ranks is a good thing. The fact that people can't even agree on which approach the current text embraces is also heartening, for their confusion is our strength.

In related news, I was absolutely astonished to read that a Virginia delegate thinks he can make it a crime for his state's gay residents to get married in another state. WTF? I can only assume this patently unconstitutional proposal is just a ploy to rake in donations from the bigot brigade. Let's hope it has no more chance of passing than Barney Frank's new bill to abolish Bill Clinton's Defense of Marriage Act.

Extra: For what it's worth, my buddy Princeton Prof. (and noted theocon) Robert George authored a column in Friday's WSJ supporting the Arlington Group's approach. Quelle surprise. Drew takes him apart.