That works fine under Sharia law, but it is still an authority making a legal definition of marriage.
If individuals and Mosques, and Mormons, and gay goat churches all decide for themselves what legal marriage is, then the marriage war is lost, besides, government or a common authority always has to have laws dealing with marriage, it always has.
exactly but tyrant to explain that it’s only one person who recognizes marriage might be well in a proper Christian community but not in those who don’t believe in God or those who want a divorce, or those with different religions and get a judge etc
THe churches will simply not obey and keep it the way it is out of civil disobedence.
No, then they will have to answer to the Supreme Judge, and I think their policies on marriage at that point will be mere evidence in the case against them rather than the issue at hand.
besides, government or a common authority always has to have laws dealing with marriage, it always has.
So the answer is to hand the FedGov more power? No, that's stupid.
Moreover, even if you put the definition of marriage as a Constitutional amendment they would likely ignore it (just look at the Bill of Rights) — it is actually advantageous to the homosexual agenda to have marriage defined in the Courts or in the Statutory Laws, the former because it's easy to pervert (given the religious reverence given to precedence
, along with the cherry-picking) and the latter because that can more-easily be changed (like by sneaking in an amending clause to some piece of federal legislation).
As an example of the courts ignoring the law, there is this story of a photographer successfully sued because they refused to provide services to a homosexual wedding
. Why is this an issue? Because the New Mexico State Constitution says this:
Art II, Sec. 11. [Freedom of religion.]
Every man shall be free to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and no person shall ever be molested or denied any civil or political right or privilege on account of his religious opinion or mode of religious worship. No person shall be required to attend any place of worship or support any religious sect or denomination; nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship.
So, if the State can utterly ignore its own Law, and the Federal Government routinely does the same, then where is the good in making this law? There is none, there is only hurt down that road.