Jonathan Rauch’s new article on gay marriage & federalism:

Jonathan Rauch’s new article in the Atlantic Monthly convinces me that the federalist approach to gay marriage is the right one. In an ideal world, it would be nice if gay marriage were recognized in every state. And adopting the federalist approach will not prevent that from occurring; on the contrary, it will help to bring gay marriage in every state…eventually. The best way to get from point A (where gay marriage exists in no state) to point B (where gay marriage is recognized in every state) is to do it gradually, step-by-step, where we allow states voluntarily, on their own accord, to implement gay marriage. I’m not going to argue this point any further, I’ll leave that to Rauch (who does it better than I ever could). I will add that I have written that if gay marriage is a right that belongs to all gays in all states, and if it is a right that the Federal courts may justly rule over, there is a right “time” for the Supreme Court to come in and establish this right—after the overwhelming majority of the states have voluntarily, on their own accord, adopted gay marriage.

I do want to point out my favorite passage in Rauch’s article:

And notice how the terms of the discussion have shifted. Now the anticipated problem is not sudden, catastrophic social harm but subtle, slow damage. Well, there might be subtle and slow social benefits, too. But more important, there would be one large and immediate benefit: the benefit for gay people of being able to get married. If we are going to exclude a segment of the population from arguably the most important of all civic institutions, we need to be certain that the group's participation would cause severe disruptions. If we are going to put the burden on gay people to prove that same-sex marriage would never cause even any minor difficulty, then we are assuming that any cost to heterosexuals, however small, outweighs every benefit to homosexuals, however large. That gay people's welfare counts should, of course, be obvious and inarguable; but to some it is not.

That last line speaks for itself. Indeed Mr. Rauch, indeed.