Anyone who is saying it's a state's right thing should just come out and say they support gay marriage.
Did the citizens of Utah want gay marriage? No, but they got it, because it was thrust upon them, because it's a federal issue.
The other cowardly thing about this argument, is that the people perpetuating it know that Justices Roberts and Kennedy are going to enforce federal gay marriage within a couple months. So what then? "Aw shucks, there's nothing we can do. I tried absolutely nothing to defend marriage, but you can't blame me because I said the magic words State's Rights (TM), so I'm off the hook."
State's rights on gay marriage is just a way to shirk responsibility, without admitting it.
Are there ANY politicians out there willing to defend marriage? Sadly, no.
State’s rights don’t matter when someone gets married in one state and moves to another, seeking either recognition of the marriage or a divorce.
Texas doesn’t have gay marriage, but there’s a lesbian couple seeking divorce. So the case involves a demand for the homosexual marriage to be recognized so the separating couple can know whether/if/how to divide the property.
“State’s rights on gay marriage is just a way to shirk responsibility, without admitting it.”
I do not think this is the case with Senator Cruz, but I do concede your point in principle. For many it is just the magic words to say when you want to sound conservative without it costing you anything or requiring any work.
IF the federal courts would truly allow each state to set its own marriage requirements and enforce them within its borders (to include refusal to recognize “illegal” marriages performed in other states), then it wouldn’t be meaningless. However, I am afraid the idea of state rights - although entirely Constitutional - has pretty much been a dead thing since the Civil War.
In truth the DOMA needs to be restored....by constitutional amendment if necessary. The federal government should NOT be recognizing homosexual marriages. IF a state wants to, then allow them (within their borders) to do so. However, the “federal” norm MUST be no recognition of homosexuality as a protected class or even a genuine lifestyle that requires “marriage” to define any unions by homosexuals.
When DOMA was wrongly destroyed by the SCOTUS, and congress went along with it...then it pretty much ruined any chance of a “State’s Rights” argument. It will fall on deaf ears in the screwed up SCOTUS.
I support Senator Cruz, but think my support would be stronger IF he said homosexuality should not enjoy the protection of a “special class” or as persons that can enter into a “marriage” recognized by the federal government. That is the real conservative position. Although it is wrong - state’s rights is pretty much a dead issue.