“This ruling is constitutional and retards the agenda of the left (federalization).
If Massachusetts wants to dignify homosexual behavior, let them. All politics are local. If you disagree, move out of Massachusetts or stay and work to correct the tragedy”
I do tend to agree that this is a question for the states to decide individually. One sticking point however is this: Most states recognize the marriages in another state.
If someone moves from a state that recognizes homosexual “marriage” to one that doesn’t, then what happens?
Does the state have to recognize that marriage? If they do not, is that a violation of the equal protection clause?
“Does the state have to recognize that marriage? If they do not, is that a violation of the equal protection clause?”
This is why it’s not up to the states. The feds jurisdiction is to maintain the definition of marriage, so that this issue doesn’t crop up.
This is why Utah had to accept the fed’s rule against polygamy before they could become a state.
If it were up to the states, then there really is no reason why they would be banned from endorsing polygamy, but this was not the case.