“believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S.,”
I understand that whole 10th Amendment thing is awkward and all but last I heard it was in the Constitution still, and it doesn’t only apply when its application suits us.
Marriage should be what it’s supposed to be, but even if some states choose poorly on this (or another) issue that doesn’t mean massive federal all-controlling government is the right answer to any question.
(comments directed at Dr. Dobson, not you, pissant)
Let me explain how the 10th Amendment works. It only says that powers which have not been granted to the federal government in the constitution are reserved to the states. So, if we pass an amendment to the federal constitution which gives the federal government the power to protect marriage then there is no 10th Amendment violation. In other words, an amendment to the constitution can never violate the 10th Amendment - not to mention the fact that even if the amendment were to contradict the 10th Amendment (which it doesn’t) then as the more recent Amendment it would simply repeal any portion of the 10th Amendment which conflicted.