What does that have to do with anything? The Const. is clear whether its gay ‘rights’ marriage or goldfish sales. If the Constitution doesn’t cover the topic, it’s up to the staes to legislate or not at their discretion. Period. End of. Done. Does the Const. say differently?
No.
Thats the why it is. There is nothing to argue or be obtuse about. Your dislike of Cruz does not change the wording, nor ammend the Constitution on the matter. It says clearly what it says.
Exactly. The Constitution is intended to delineate what the government can do. When it is silent on a topic the Government has no authority. I would go so far as to say where an amendment restricts or abridges an individual right it would be contrary to the Constitution. The 9th&10th amendments seem to clarify and restrict the scope for all of the Constitution, past and future.
But the overturning of proposition 8 in California is probably a bellwether. A government-defined institution of marriage is going to be subject to the premise of equal protection and to limits of government powers and authorities.