George Will for the Win.

While some activists have moved on to other progressive causes as they've gained civil rights in their home states, plenty still have their eyes on the prize: full legal recognition and equal legal rights for married gay and straight couples in all 50 states.

Read George Will's column today, in that light:

The fundamental division in U.S. politics is between those who take their bearings from the individual’s right to a capacious, indeed indefinite, realm of freedom, and those whose fundamental value is the right of the majority to have its way in making rules about which specified liberties shall be respected.

For the many Americans who are puzzled and dismayed by the heatedness of political argument today, the message of Timothy Sandefur’s “The Conscience of the Constitution: The Declaration of Independence and the Right to Liberty” is this: The temperature of today’s politics is commensurate to the stakes of today’s argument.
...
Sandefur says progressivism “inverts America’s constitutional foundations” by holding that the Constitution is “about” democracy, which rejects the framers’ premise that majority rule is legitimate “only within the boundaries” of the individual’s natural rights. These include — indeed, are mostly — unenumerated rights whose existence and importance are affirmed by the Ninth Amendment.

Many conservatives should be discomfited by Sandefur’s analysis, which entails this conclusion: Their indiscriminate denunciations of “judicial activism” inadvertently serve progressivism. The protection of rights, those constitutionally enumerated and others, requires a judiciary actively engaged in enforcing what the Constitution is “basically about,” which is making majority power respect individuals’ rights.

In other words, despite the political tactics of the Right in recent decades, we don't put individual rights up for majority vote.

Sadly, in the states that did, we've empowered people to believe that other people's civil rights somehow depend on the voting whims of the majority: that they can deny those protections and unenumerated rights based on popular vote.

George Will is writing the way out.
How will we now sell the country on a judicial decision that many will reject as illegitimate in those regions and localities where there is simply no history of recognizing the full civil equality of gay people? This is how. We talk of our system of laws; our reliance as a country on principles of equality and justice.

When you have conservative thinker George Will essentially arguing that:
the "individual’s right to a capacious, indeed indefinite, realm of freedom"
trumps
"those whose fundamental value is the right of the majority to have its way in making rules about which specified liberties shall be respected",
then you're already there...

Take a look around.