Whenever I take stock of my position on an issue, I always measure it up against the principle of maximization of liberty. Sometimes it leads me to positions that I might not feel particularly good about, but by what I know is correct by the principle I stand for. President Bush, despite the good that he has done for the country in pursuing the war on terror, has lost my vote on his endorsement of an anti-gay marriage amendment.
I don't seem to be alone in this. Asparagirl (she's the one who picked the name, not me) is a Republican who has until now been a staunch supporter of the president. Her reasoning is very similar to mine, though much more concisely expressed (please pardon the language):
You cannot praise John Doe for voting for Bush because he wants to defend our pluralistic, tolerant, democratic way of life against crazy-ass (Islamic) fundamentalists and then condemn Jane Roe for not voting for Bush because she wants to defend our pluralistic, tolerant, democratic way of life against crazy-ass (Christian) fundamentalists. It's the same fucking issue, people. Either we can learn to live with other people who make choices that don't fit the contours of our particular religious structures--whether it's choosing to wear a burqua (or not) or choosing to spend your life with a guy or a girl (or not) or choosing to keep kosher or halal or vegan (or not)--or we can't. That's the advice we want to deal out to most of the Arab/Muslim world, but perhaps we should be listening, too.
For pretty much the same reasoning, I too shall, as she puts it, be sitting on my hands come election day.