I know that I should say something about the backlash and debate over Indianaâ??s version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, but itâ??s been hard to come up with something that I didnâ??t already say in my column when it was Arizonaâ??s variation on the same law, vetoed under pressure, that was in the news. That column made the case that the only remaining question in the same-sex marriage â??debateâ? was what kind of space, if any, an ascendant cultural liberalism would leave to Americans with traditional views on what constitutes a marriage; that the correlation of forces (corporate now as well as cultural and legal) was such that the choice of exactly how far to push and how much pluralism to permit would be almost entirely in the hands of liberals and supporters of same-sex marriage. Thatâ??s still basically how it looks to me today: Elements of the Indiana debate have been particularly â?¦ striking, but none of it has been particularly surprising given how this played out in Arizona.