They would still have the power to regulate them.
I don't understand what you are asking. Right now the states have the authority over marriage laws. Or at least some do. Massachusetts gave up that authority to some activist judges, but that's their problem. Bachmann's proposal would simply define marriage in the traditional sense, which is similar to how my state does it. The authority to manage the process would still remain with the state and local governments.
Dune? Not so much. Jarod the brilliant attorney? Not at all.
In msg 9 Annie wrote,
To which I replied in msg 75,
So, what would happen if States were permitted to define marriage and not obliged to recognize marriages from other States?
The same example can be used for same sex marriage. Most marriage laws stipulate assets acquired during marriage are equally divided. If a spouse moves to a State that does not recognize same sex marriage and buys a home, then applies for divorce some time later, is his "wife" or "husband" or legally sanctioned "butt buddy" entitled to half the home?
For example, let's say a same sex married couple (we'll call them Bill and John) live in Mass. They decide to retire to Texas in a year as Bill is retired and John will retire next year. To prepare for their retirement they sell their home in Mass and Bill and John rent an apartment. Meanwhile, Bill goes to Texas and looks for a suitable home (a cozy love nest for the retiring couple).
Bill finds a potential home, John visits and checks it out, likes the place and agrees. John has to return to Mass to go to work so Bill stays in Texas to complete the transaction (purchase).
A month or so passes and Bill hasn't returned to Mass, John is worried Bill has found another lover, John goes to Texas to see what's happening. When he arrives at the house Bill says "Who the hell are you" and demands he get off his property.
How can John sue for half the house, being Bill's husband/wife, when Texas does not recognize same sex marriage?
As another poster noted there has to be standards across the country otherwise confusion reigns. Now do you understand?
In msg 9 Annie wrote,
To which I replied in msg 75,
So, what would happen if States were permitted to define marriage and not obliged to recognize marriages from other States?
The same example can be used for same sex marriage. Most marriage laws stipulate assets acquired during marriage are equally divided. If a spouse moves to a State that does not recognize same sex marriage and buys a home, then applies for divorce some time later, is his "wife" or "husband" or legally sanctioned "butt buddy" entitled to half the home?
For example, let's say a same sex married couple (we'll call them Bill and John) live in Mass. They decide to retire to Texas in a year as Bill is retired and John will retire next year. To prepare for their retirement they sell their home in Mass and Bill and John rent an apartment. Meanwhile, Bill goes to Texas and looks for a suitable home (a cozy love nest for the retiring couple).
Bill finds a potential home, John visits and checks it out, likes the place and agrees. John has to return to Mass to go to work so Bill stays in Texas to complete the transaction (purchase).
A month or so passes and Bill hasn't returned to Mass, John is worried Bill has found another lover, John goes to Texas to see what's happening. When he arrives at the house Bill says "Who the hell are you" and demands he get off his property.
How can John sue for half the house, being Bill's husband/wife, when Texas does not recognize same sex marriage?
As another poster noted there has to be standards across the country otherwise confusion reigns. Now do you understand?