It just worked out that way.
The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that defining marriage as an institution between a man and a woman was discriminatory.
And now the issue goes back to the states, where it truly belongs, so we can fight, argue, squabble and heap insults upon each other — like "bigot" and "inhuman" — in the name of love.
And one of those states is dark-blue Illinois.
Those fixated on national politics should remember that Illinois is the birthplace (either actual or metaphorical) of two of the leading political figures in our country, both of whom applauded the demise of the Defense of Marriage Act on Wednesday: President Barack Obama and his anointed successor, former Secretary of State Hillary "What Difference Does It Make?" Clinton.
Obama once campaigned for the White House as something of a moral traditionalist. But he was ecstatic Wednesday that the Supreme Court ruled DOMA was wrong.
Marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a woman for thousands upon thousands of years, in cultures great and small, advanced and barbaric, from pre-Christian times onward.
But Obama and the court majority held it was discriminatory, and by their language they suggest that those who support such traditional views are actively engaged in discriminatory behavior.
"This was discrimination enshrined in law," Obama said. "We are a people who declared that we are all created equal — and the love we commit to one another must be equal as well."
Clinton was ecstatic as well. She released a joint statement with her husband, Bill, the former president and presumptive First Laddie in what could be a Hillary administration.
Both Clintons congratulated the Supreme Court majority and ridiculed DOMA.
"By overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, the court recognized that discrimination towards any group holds us all back in our efforts to form a more perfect union," Bill and Hillary said in their statement.
Perfect union. Nice.
But they forgot to mention the name of the president who signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law in 1996. His name? Bill Clinton.
I'm sure someone will write the editors to complain that stubborn consistency is also discriminatory, or at least that it is the hobgoblin of my little mind.
But I've evolved too. As an Orthodox Christian, I'm compelled not to support gay marriage. Yet as an American who reveres the Constitution — and one who won't try to bend it to my whims as do some on the political left — I figure that everyone is entitled to equal protection.
That includes gay couples.
So the fight over what is and what is not a marriage moves back to the states, to be subjected to the energies of democratic federalism. Let's see what happens.
If you think marriage should be between a man and a woman, tell your legislators. If you don't, tell them. Elections are at hand. Let the states, meaning the people, decide this.