[lugsoul]

Now you are being obtuse again.

The amendment, as written, denies the "legal incidents" of marriage - inheritance rights, survivorship property rights, hospital visitation rights, medical consent rights, medical benefits, etc. - to those in legal partnerships which are not marriage between a man and woman. Your argument that it expressly allows legal "civil unions" as determined by the state is false, and you know it.

[goldstategop]

It prevents court judges from making that determination. The amendment leaves it up to the state legislature to determine to whom legal incidents can be granted as long as they do not contradict the status of whom marriage is restricted to.

[tjwmason]

The amendment, as written, denies the "legal incidents" of marriage - [SNIP] - to those in legal partnerships which are not marriage between a man and woman.

Where?

It merely states that anarcho-leftist activist judges may not read those 'rights' into constitutions.

If your own state of Georgia passed a bill which created a legal civil partnership, and endowed that partnership with rights (including all of the incidents of marriage which you defined), then this amendment does diddly-squat. Please learn the difference between a positive legislative action, and a constitution.