With a cautious Barney Frank, a gleeful (though literally guarded) Gavin Newsom, a dancing Governor Schwarzenegger, a wavering John Kerry and a defiant Bush all throwing in their two-cents worth on marriage equality this week, it’s no wonder voters’ heads are spinning. Schwarzenegger one week compares gay marriage to illegal ownership of assault weapons, then the next week casually tells Jay Leno that gay marriage would be “fine with me” if the law were changed to permit it. Presidential candidate John Kerry, who in 1996 called The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) “gay-bashing,” this past week comes out against marriage for gays and lesbians, and declines to reaffirm his position on DOMA. Meanwhile, Dick Cheney, who in the 2000 election said that the issue of marriage equality should be decided by the states, recently flip-flopped and said he supports the President’s call for a constitutional amendment even though he claims to support his openly-lesbian daughter.

Out of all of these marital problems, at least a couple of things are clear.

For one, people from all sides are being careful. The legislators are careful, the candidates are careful, and even our national gay and lesbian organizations are being careful, by declining to put Democratic candidates to a marriage test that may cost them an election. Few of us, with the possible exception of George Bush and Gavin Newsom, are actually saying what we think.

Is it OK to be careful? Is it compromise — or uncompromising conviction — that leads the way to equality?

In some ways, we want to say: Please. Thousands have married in San Francisco, and the right to marry is being backed up by court decisions. There’s momentum happening from the ground (at San Francisco’s City Hall) up, and from the top (Massachusetts high court) down. This is the stuff of history, so let’s cut out the lukewarm statements and political hand-wringing and follow the momentum! Make demands! Hold people accountable!

But in other ways, we’re also feeling careful — like Winnie Stachelberg, political director of the Human Rights Campaign, who says of John Kerry (in a story on page 30 of this issue): “It’s always disappointing when we find elected officials or candidates who do not support us 100 percent. … But we understand that people are on a journey of becoming more understanding and more supportive of all that affects the gay and lesbian community.”

As lukewarm as that and other public statements from our GLBT organizations may sound, it nevertheless represents a maturing, if you will, of the GLBT activist community. We need a Democrat in the White House, and our GLBT organizations realize that calls for reasoned, honest statements that reflect political realities. The GLBT activist community is learning to play politics.

Meanwhile, op-ed columnists foresee a possible cultural war of the sort that demonized ultra-conservative Pat Buchanan in the 1992 elections, and made the liberal Michael Dukakis look like a wet noodle in 1988. Kerry is being careful about going too far to the left — if 55 percent of the country is against marriage equality, then by-golly the presidential candidates will be against marriage equality. That’s just the way Washington works.

But, the other thing that is clear amid all of the confusion is that this issue has been catapulted to the forefront, with few from either side prepared for it. It’s taken everyone by surprise and it’s raised the stakes for equality. Politicians like Kerry, who was one of only 14 legislators who refused to sign DOMA in 1996, are now seen as against gay marriage. Progressives used to be for civil unions — now that’s the more conservative position to take, with progressives being for full marriage equality.

Suddenly, with a Massachusetts high court saying it’s legal, and with Gavin Newsom, New Paltz, NY Mayor Jason West and now Oregon’s Multnomah County attorney Agnes Sowle giving out marriage licenses, more is expected of our politicians. This, at least, is progress.

Not to nit-pick, but while we appreciate the maturity and restraint demonstrated by the Winnie Stachelbergs of the world, we’d like to see some candid, uncompromising statements alongside the realism. We don’t feel it’s too much for a politician in an election year to take a clear stand for what is right — and to come out with a clear-cut position in favor of the equality that our constitution so eloquently calls for.

Few politicians out there would have chosen this issue as a platform and a focus for the election — but they’re stuck with it. Like women’s suffrage, slavery, segregation and inter-racial marriage, marriage equality is the kind of issue that creates a legacy for a political leader.

George Bush and Gavin Newsom have quite possibly chosen their legacies. What will be yours, John Kerry, Dick Cheney, Mary Cheney, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dick Murphy, Ron Roberts? We’ll be watching the politicians’ ever-evolving positions on this issue, so watch this space.