Should Clinton's evolution on gay marriage be given a more favorable look in light of Sanders belief

that reparations are too impractical and divisive to be advocated for now?

In the 1990s, marriage equality was enormously unpopular, clearly divisive and seemed to have little to no chance of ever becoming law. But much has changed since then and, in the new light of day, Hillary Clinton's lukewarm stance on the issue has been fervently derided in many quarters. However, her position at the time was no different than Bernie Sanders' current opposition to reparations, which are unpopular and, in Sanders' view, divisive and unlikely ever to become reality.

If Bernie Sanders' pragmatism regarding reparations is defensible, shouldn't Hillary Clinton's pragmatism about marriage equality also be defensible, given the atmosphere of the time?

And, if not, if in 20 or 30 years, as the country becomes even more diverse and open-minded, reparations measures are actually put into effect (a possibility no more unthinkable than legalized gay marriage would have been 20 years ago), would it be fair to castigate Sanders for his failure to support them in 2016?