[newgeezer]

This is not a state issue. How can one state entitle "couples" to federal benefits and another state not.

On the one hand, citizens continue to be free to move to whichever state best suits their chosen lifestyle.

Unfortunately, there's Article IV, Section I, where each state has to recognize the public acts, records, etc. of the others. I think that's what Congress was trying to solve with the Federal Marriage Act (or whatever the current law is called).

Regardless, any such "Federal benefits" you have in mind, e.g. Social Security benefits, are likely unconstitutional. That's the real problem coming back to bite us on the backside. If this nation hadn't strayed so freakin' far from what was intended, "Federal benefits" wouldn't be an issue.

[biblewonk]

You changed the subject because I have a good point. This is a federal issue because it involves some 1049 benefits many of which are given by the federal government to "families". The state will find itself trumped again when it says you's guys don't get these benefits from the federal government and another state allows them to have said benefits.