Here I construe Janet R. Jakobsen and Ann Pellegrini's proposal to protect freedom of sexual expression among consenting adults within an agonistic theory of democracy. Jakobsen and Pellegrini argue contrary to the U.S. Constitution, state legislatures have intervened in political conflicts over sexual morality by “establishing” sectarian Christian mores, and they urge more robust protection of religious and sexual expression. I develop three themes in response: First, to display the democratic framework of their proposal, I briefly set out the constitutional analogy on which Jakobsen and Pellegrini depend; second, I explain Jakobsen and Pellegrini's rejection of the ethos of tolerance in light of the agonistic political theory of William E. Connolly; and third, I propose that Freud's theory of mourning and melancholia may point to affective resources for invigorating practices of freedom.