Well, what can you do, pissant? If people change, you can't and shouldn't always run to the federal government to control them. How about a federal dress code? There's just some things you have to put up with in a free nation made up of distinct states with cultural differences.
The framers put up with differences just as bad, if not worse. They had to compromise with human traffickers and their supporters. But it was worth it. Wasn't it?
BTTT. Very well said.
Yes, things change. And some things are worth preserving. Now Fred had his panties in a wad over term limits and tried mightily to get that passed as a constitutional amendment. If the founders wanted term limits, they would have put them in. Willing to tell states they have to have term limits for congresscritters is more important than the institution of marriage?
If there was even a hint of a movement for gay marriage in 1787, it would not be a problem today. It would have been dealt with.
So Fred would rather screw with the full faith and credit clause in the constitution than just get rid of the problem altogether.
“There’s just some things you have to put up with in a free nation made up of distinct states with cultural differences.”
No, I must respectfully disagree. There are some universals that must remain constant from state to state. Thompson’s devotion to his FREDeralism is hurting him as a candidate and potential president.
BTW - The framers didn’t address such issues because the common mood of the country would not allow such things. I don’t think any of them could imagine how much America would literally degenerate over time.
Utah wasn’t allowed to enter the union until it canned polygamy. Why wasn’t that cultural way allowed? Because it was bad for the union, the same way homosexual marriage is.