“any adult can make whatever contract they wish with whomever”
This is actually not true in the slightest. Please show where in the constitution it says this.
Not all the laws in the united states postdate the consitution. Some of them predate the constitution. Marriage, Habeaus Corpus, and trial by jury are three parts of the English common law and were the law in the English colonies prior to the formation of the United States.
The English Common Law definition of marriage? One man and one woman for life. Reynolds vs the US goes on the describe how the role of the federal government is to defend this definition of marriage, by barring polygamy. This is the same reasoning behind (as we see), spousal visas.
Thanks to liberaltarians like yourself - you’ve just opened the door to transform the US into marriage tourism for the rest of the world. You’ll see homosexual men and woman around the world with official grand spanking new - American citizenship.
The federal government does have a constitutional role in regulating marriage.
again another liberal who moves south and then brings their liberal, communist agenda to the south and then comes up with crap like why is it not unconstitutional while ignoring where doe sit state marriage is a right.
I wish these people would piss off and leave us alone or keep their sex life quiet.
All they want to do is push their agenda onto us and destroy anything which made America great.
Most liberaltarians are more tot he left than most liberals I have met and known and yet these liberaltarains think of themselves as on the right due to them never wanting to pay taxes but they can’t get it into their heads that thye are more the left of liberals minus taxes because they hate paying their way , pure anarchy is what they want
Just wait until these crazies start acknowledging marriage to donkeys and sheep, and then we can pay survivors’ benefits to donkeys and sheep....just great!!!
Why? The Constitution does not grant Rights; but A1S10C1 does state a non-imparting of contracts.
I concur some religions state marriage as ‘man and wife’. There IS a 1st A. Right to practice ones’ religion; some of those being NON-Christian. It is your Reynolds vs. U.S. that shows gov’t, again, NOT following the Constitution; their whole argument against bigamy (IE: human sacrifice) being a straw-man (the sacrifice being denied Life, Liberty...).
Marriage tourism? Sorry, I’m not following what *I* have allowed in your last statement. As for any Fed. gov’t control, unless it’s in A1S8, there is NO authority granted.