That makes no sense at all. It's like saying if there was a right to peacefully assemble all of us would be assembled somewhere. And I note the that the right to peacefully assemble is a group right. No individual can "peacefully assemble" - they need the cooperation of others to exercise this right. And the right to peacefully assemble can be conditioned on obtaining a license or permit if the group wants to assemble in certain places at cetain times. And not all marriages are licensed - some states still recognize common law marriage. So you are wrong on every assertion you made.
If there was a right to marry, there would never have been restrictions placed on it.
Liberals are seeking to sweep away one type of long-standing restriction. But one can argue then, if its a right, why can’t every else have it also?
Common law marriages are a type of marital privilege sanctioned by certain states. They could abolish it if they want to.
That can’t happen to a right for those eligible to exercise it. Hence the difference.