Rights that apply to "persons" do not necessarily apply to "couples" or other groups of persons, except for the "right of people peacably to assemble" as mentioned in the First Amendment.
The Ninth Amendment acknowledges that although certain rights are set forth in the Bill of Rights, there are other rights, not specifically mentioned, which also exist. The right to enter into contracts, to move about the country, to own property, and so on, are often mentioned as typical of the non-mentioned rights that might be referred to in the Ninth Amendment. No rational person has ever suggested that the right to marry someone of the same gender is one of the non-mentioned rights of the Ninth Amendment.
Viewed correctly, marriage is a package of legal rights, obligations, and prerogatives promulgated by the States (and the District of Columbia) to meet the respective states' domestic objectives, and granted to those who qualfy and jump through the necessary hoops to be married in that state. If you are too young, if you lack legal capacity, or if your relationship with the other party is not permitted, you simply cannot marry them.
It is analogous to obtaining a driver's license. You do NOT have a "constitutional" right to drive a car anywhere in any state. You have a constitutional right to OWN a car and to travel anywhere you like, but to DRIVE the car (without fear of being prosecuted for a crime or summary offense), you MUST jump through the appropriate hoops.
Promulgating laws regulating marriage is one of the rights/powers that is, "...reserved to the states, respectively..." under the Tenth Amendment.
Each state, and the federal government, must give, "full faith and credit" to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every (other) state. Thus, if a couple is married in one state and moves to another state, the second state cannot refuse to recognize that marriage, even if it could not have been legally entered into in the second state.
The USSC has reaffirmed this principle with respect to the so-called Defense of Marriage Act.
The Supreme Court has not ever declared that "couples" of the same gender have a constitutional right to "marry" each other. The very idea is preposterous.
U.S. Federal District Court and Circuit Court judges have, however, occasionally made such declarations (i.e., been guilty of eggregious "judicial activism"), expressing their personal opinions on what they think the Constitution ought to have said, but doesn't, and knowing that ultimately the USSC will have to try to find a "right" to marry someone of the same gender. Or not.
For anyone hoping that the USSC will one day defend the "sanctity of marriage," you need to get over it, take a pill, or something like that. The battle is not over but it is lost. Within a few short years "gay marriage" will be legally performed in every state. Utah will CALL gay marriage and RAISE polygamy and incest.
And really, who gives a shit? If your church doesn't recognize gay "marriage" that should be good enough for anyone. My church doesn't recognize marriages performed by the state, or divorces either. So there.
