The "values" wing of the Republican party decided, against the advice of their more libertarian brethren, to wage a social war against same sex marriage and, whatever the Supreme Court decides in its two big marriage cases, the "values" bloc has clearly lost the fight.  Though your experience may vary by region, the country has evolved to at best a pro-same sex marriage consensus and at least a healthy "live and let live," attitude about it.

The Republican party will have to deal with a growing schism between its elites, who seem to be evolving with the rest of the culture and its Bible Belt stalwarts, who are refusing.  That is their problem and they'll get no help from me.  Let them fight.  Meanwhile, the arbiters of culture (artists and media moguls both) will continue to deliver a message of acceptance and endorsement that will push the anti-rights zealots further and further from the mainstream.

Today, David Brooks, one the Republican elite, has tried to spin this civil right triumph won by the left as a victory for conservative values.  Homosexuals want to get married, he argues, which means they are adopting conservative social morality.  In Brooks' twisted morality:

"Marriage is one of those institutions — along with religion and military service — that restricts freedom. Marriage is about making a commitment that binds you for decades to come. It narrows your options on how you will spend your time, money and attention."

Brooks looks at the whole civil rights movement around homosexuality as one of people begging to give up their freedoms.  They want to get married and to be able to enlist in the military.

But really, this is all about freedom and always has been.  It's been about the freedom of long-term committed same sex couples to access the protections (shared insurance, implied inheritance, power of attorney, the right to adopt children) that the federal government has long assured heterosexual couples.  It's about the freedom to, if it is your calling, fight for your country without hiding your sexuality.  Brooks should keep in mind that, valor aside, military service is, in fact, a government job that all qualified citizens should be eligible for, should they have the desire.

Brooks can pretend all he wants that society's transformation on this issue is some sort of victory for "traditional values."  It isn't.  These are some of the most progressive and pro-freedom moments in American history as restrictionist busybodies are being pushed to the sidelines of culture.