You want to change the Constitution to enforce your moral standards (which, incidentally, I agree with) on the entire country, and you have the nerve to insinuate that I'm a "blind power grabber" because I prefer to deal with reining in the judicial branch instead?
I want to change the Constitution to put in black and white a forgotten principle: That we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. That Creator who gave us rights also designed us as male and female...and when a man and a woman are joined together as one they are able to reproduce children so humanity can continue on into the future. Family is already defined by our Creator in the same way rights are endowed by our Creator. To leave states free to deny the truth about marriage and family is the same as allowing states to redefine all other self-evident truths.
If you want to define that as forcing morality then what's the difference if you force it by the local government? Your argument that it is force is an argument against any traditional marriage laws.
Our nation went through this marriage crises before back in the 1800's and the issue was polygamy. The solution required the involvement of the federal government then, and it will require the same thing now. If you do what Fred wants to do and write the "right" to ignore self-evident truths about marriage and family as given to us by our Creator, then there is no way to deny them FEDERAL recognition and benefits. When a heterosexual couple marries, they are recognized as married by the federal government. You can't say it isn't a federal issue when right at the top of your federal tax return you are asked for a filing status of married or single.