I actually have another conversation going with a friend on a related topic and we've come down to agreeing that "if the wrong in the Constitution is not directed at you personally, then waiting for a) the legislature to correct the wrong and b) having the Court rule as Scalia claims he does (trying to figure out what the document itself or any amendment within it meant at the time it was adopted) is palatable." I'm actually almost on the other side in my other conversation. I've been arguing with him that "If you believe in the principles upon which this country was founded and the notions of government within the Constitution, then you have to wait for the legislature to amend the Constitution before you can do anything to correct the injustices it contains." Moreover, I'm claiming that the Dred Scott decision (from this framework) was a good decision.
FWIW, I too, tire of the argument ;0)