[rollo tomasi]

I hope you also call for the abolishment of the Social Security Act and any Federal benefit that goes towards spouses of the deceased. Also Mr. Constitutional scholar, how would you go about revoking the income tax laws, federal mind you, that grant spousal "benefits"? Built in all those Federal laws are specific areas in which the Federal government defines what a spouse is, and it ain't Adam and Steve.

In theory you are correct, but the Federal government's expansion in the 20th century clearly convoluted your theory. Please read what constitutes a spouse, say wife, under the Social Security Act. This becomes self evident that a need to define a legal marriage is required if people understood reason instead of a Constitution which has been trampled upon way before DOMA.

[Amendment10]

"I hope you also call for the abolishment of the Social Security Act and any Federal benefit that goes towards spouses of the deceased. .."

Thank you for your concern about the spouses of the deceased. Please consider the following concerning such spouses.

Not only has each state always had the 10th Amendment protected power to run its own customized SS program to insure that the spouses of the deceased have an income, but there's never been anything to stop the states from exercising their unique, Ariticle V power to ratify proposed amendments to the Constitution to do to grant Congress the specific power to tax and spend for a national SS program.

In other words, just as it did with constitutonally indefensible federal Obamacare, Congress wrongy established SS without first petitioning the Article V state majority to ratify amendments to the Constitution which would have granted Congress the specific powers that it needed to establish such programs.

[zeestephen]

If the primary argument here is “equal protection,” would that not also open a clear legal path for incestuous marriage and polygamy?