Few of us do want this.
However, the Constitution requires each state to recognize the acts of all other states. So if MA allows homosexuals to marry, FL and MT will be required to recognize as married those homosexuals who have been declared to be married in MA.
Essentially, leaving family law in "the jurisdiction of the states" means that the every state will be required to recognize whatever variant of marriage the most liberal and debauched state recognizes.
This could very easily lead to recognition of group marriage, short-term temporary marriage and other practices the vast majority of Americans oppose. Should none of them have a voice, or should two or three judges found using court-shoppping methods be allowed to decide such issues for us all?
Judges of this type violate the plain word and spirit of the constitution every day, then their supporters argue that we shouldn't use the only tool left to us, a Constitutional amendment, because we "shouldn't mess withe Constitution."
I absolutely agree, we shouldn't. You first. If you don't, I will have no desire to do so. I like it just fine the way it is.
That's not true. The Defense of Marriage Act enacted pursuant to Article IV of the Constitution precludes any other jurisdiction from having to recognize any marriage other than between one man and one woman. There is no danger to traditional marriage in any state that recognizes only traditional marriage. The issue in Massachusetts is one for the people of that state to resolve, and no federal constitutional amendment is required.