As long as the Constitution does not give the Federal government any say over marriage, then Ted Cruz’s position is the Constitutionally correct one. But let no one think for an instant that Ted Cruz favors same-sex marriage. That’s absurd.
The task then becomes to amend the Constitution so that marriage is within the federal domain.
Either that or work within individual states to ban it there, with the federal courts kept out of it. The jurisdiction federal courts could be taken away simply by statute.
It seems to me that whenever it has been left up to the people of a state , they invariably choose to protect traditional (i.e. true) marriage.
Did you read the article? Slavery was a states rights issue too. How did that work out?
Tell me, why did Utah have to ban polygamy as a requirement before joining the Union?
The first Republican platform wanted to banish both slavery and polygamy. There is plenty of history on favoring Judeo-Christian values nationwide. The fundamental definition cannot be different in different states without chaos. The states can decide age. Everyone gets older so the difference is only temporary. Things like that. Not the fundamental definition.
I like Cruz. He does not go far enough on marriage. I’ll take it as better than nothing. It is different from Paul, better than Paul, and yes, he is against homo marriage. That is clear. I don’t think Paul gives a hoot.