Dahlia Lithwick perfectly states a point in Slate that's been rattling in my mind for some time now:

"A Defense of Marriage Amendment would enshrine, for the first time, language of intolerance and exclusion in a document that was intended to set forth basic rights. Does President Bush really want to be remembered as the guy who first used the Constitution to codify bigotry?"

Furthering her point, conservatives love "State Rights" when it allows states to exercise traditional bigotry. That is why "State Rights" has long been a racist byword. But it's a shame, since federalism's chief virtue is allowing smaller groups of people the ability to choose what laws are appropriate to their circumstances. Another clear example of conservative federalist hypocrisy is found in the fight against medical marijuana laws. I know these laws are being used as a first step to outright legalization, (and I don't quite know how I feel about that), but federalism should allow states to make these decisions. If the issue was a conservative one, these same persecutors would be crying "State Rights".