Replies

Marriage existed in 1776. It's not a new concept.

Precisely. It needed no governmental entity to define it then, nor does it now. It existed and exists as it is, despite our insane refusal to acknowledge it.

The Founders could have elected to federalize marriage, but the decided that it was a administrative task best left to the individual states.

Right again. Administering marriage is a minor task until depraved factions such as sexually-disoriented perverts begin winning converts from among an immoral populace.

When this happens, however, and the very existence of the nation itself is put at risk, desperation will compel patriots to desperate measures. And yes, we'll even sacrifice our Constitution to save our nation.

Nor will you be holding any moral high ground, clinging to the Constitution as the final wave pulls you under.

God didn't write the Constitution, after all. It's not infallible, nor is it a bulletproof shield to protect us from all assaults. It has its limitations, which we are wise to acknowledge. And like every other constitution, those limitations are to be found in the people.

People who play make-believe with marriage can hardly be considered fit for self-government. While you and I would prefer a government "as small and unobtrusive as possible," instead we get one whose job is to control those lacking in self-control.

"Precisely. It needed no governmental entity to define it then, nor does it now. It existed and exists as it is, despite our insane refusal to acknowledge it. "

Not "precisely". Prior to the existence of the US, many European states, to include England, had adopted the marriage license, or some other official procedure of marital recognition by the state. In fact, many of the colonies had already enacted miscegenation laws at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. But, the Founders found absolutely NO REASON to wade the federal government into this aspect of daily life. They believed it was a matter left to the states.

So, I have no idea why you'd make the ridiculous statement of "precisely".

"God didn't write the Constitution, after all. It's not infallible, nor is it a bulletproof shield to protect us from all assaults. It has its limitations, which we are wise to acknowledge. And like every other constitution, those limitations are to be found in the people."

I have no idea what you're rambling about, but I'm not quite sure I see any reason to ignore the 10th Amendment just because you don't like how some states are regulating marriage.

Are there any other Amendments you'd like to ignore because they don't comport with your personal understanding of "God's Word"?

We aren't a nation governed by preachers and Imams, and their interpretation of their respective holy scriptures. We are a nation governed by laws - federal and state. And, our federal law(s) say that marriage is something plainly left to the states, as it should be.