That's nonsense. If Montana doesn't issue (for example) drivers licenses to anyone under 25, then no one under 25 drives, and that includes anyone under 25 from another state who moves there with a valid license from the other state. The license from the other state is useless in Montana. A license for any imagined activity, illegal in Montana, legal elsewhere, isn't going to hold any weight in Montana. The full faith and credit clause was never intended to force a state to permit illegal behavior just because that behavior is legal in some other state.
This whole idea of preemptively amending the Constitution is hysterical madness. The federal courts are going to decide this matter before this stupid amendment ever gets passed anyway. Sheez, the things people worry about.
Your driver's license analogy is flawed. First, a driver's license is different from a marriage license. A driver's license can be suspended or cancelled by the state at any time. A state can not cancel or suspend a marriage. Driving is considered a privelige, not a right. Marriage is considered a right.
A better analogy would be the age when people are allowed to marry.
It varies from state to state. For arguments sake, let's say it is 15 in Mass., and 17 in Montana. So, two people (male and female) get married at 15 in Mass. Parent's consent. Perfectly legal in Mass. She immediatly gets pregnant. They have a child. Then they move to Montana. Neither has turned 16 yet. They are both still only 15.
Can the state of Montana dissolve their marriage because they aren't of legal age (17) to marry in Montana? Can the state of Montana refuse to recognize their marriage?
Most judges (imho) would say no they can't. The constitution already has extra language in it protecting marriage (spouses can't be forced to testify against each other.) It is clear that marriage falls into a special category.
Given the activist nature of so many judges, I don't think it will be that hard to find one that is willing to extend the protections provided traditional marriages by the consistution's full faith and credit clause to a gay marriage that was legally established in another state.
It only takes one judge in each state to get the job done.
"The constitution already has extra language in it protecting marriage (spouses can't be forced to testify against each other.) It is clear that marriage falls into a special category."
My copy of the US Constitution seems to be missing the section which has to do with spousal testimony. Could you refresh my memory as to where exactly that is written?
Thanks.
dvwjr
dittos.