On Medved’s show yesterday he was arguing with someone who called in to complain that interracial marriage used to be considered “wrong” by 80% of California’s population, so the fact that popular support for homosexual marriage has not yet turned the corner for the gay lobby is no indication of its justice. I thought that was an interesting argument because, on its surface, it is entirely correct. (Similar to Lincoln’s argument about popular sovereignty.) Popular opinion ought not to determine the justice of a thing. But what ought to? I was sorry Medved did not pursue it in these terms. It probably would have exposed this tension I talk about. Today’s “progressives” are mostly not conscious of this tension between accepting evolving standards of right and wrong and their demanding of recognition for their particular or prevailing “prejudice.”