Is Kim Davis wrong? Or is the Supreme Ct wrong about requiring acceptance of same-sex "marriage"?

[MisterBeale]

Excellent post. I agree. Yes, they should be jailed and the justices of the Supreme Court should be in jail too. It is a wicked bunch and I am believing God for His judgment to fall on them and everyone else who was behind it. I pray God's judgment is swift and powerful and that all those who witness it depart from evil and begin to fear the LORD.

Hey, guy, maybe some of us don't believe in your God and don't want to live in a theocracy.

Has that ever occurred to you?

Here's an idea. If you don't like gay marriage, don't have one!

If you don't like guns Joe, don't buy one.

Winner winner chicken dinner.

-Geaux

And if you don't like gays don't suck a dick.

I totally agree with this.

And I think this government should just get out of the marriage business entirely. I think this probably is where government uses marriage as a way of social engineering. It used to link it with raising families.

By making gay marriage socially acceptable, it makes it legitimate in the public eyes as a tool for "family," and thus the adoption and raising of children. This then becomes just as acceptable, say in custody hearings where a father/step-mother vs. mother/step-mother scenario might come into play. Most common sense folks instinctively know which environment is better to raise a child. However our brainwashing pseudo-intellectual socio-engineers would have us believe reality is something other than it is. Most of us are rebelling against this notion, regardless of religion.

Dear Gay Community: Your Kids Are Hurting
I loved my mom’s partner, but another mom could never have replaced the father I lost.
Dear Gay Community: Your Kids Are Hurting

Why Can’t Gay People’s Kids Be Honest?

Gay marriage doesn’t just redefine marriage, but also parenting. It promotes and normalizes a family structure that necessarily denies us something precious and foundational. It denies us something we need and long for, while at the same time tells us that we don’t need what we naturally crave. That we will be okay. But we’re not. We’re hurting.

If anyone can talk about hard things, it’s us.

Kids of divorced parents are allowed to say, “Hey, mom and dad, I love you, but the divorce crushed me and has been so hard. It shattered my trust and made me feel like it was my fault. It is so hard living in two different houses.” Kids of adoption are allowed to say, “Hey, adoptive parents, I love you. But this is really hard for me. I suffer because my relationship with my first parents was broken. I’m confused and I miss them even though I’ve never met them.”

But children of same-sex parents haven’t been given the same voice. It’s not just me. There are so many of us. Many of us are too scared to speak up and tell you about our hurt and pain, because for whatever reason it feels like you’re not listening. That you don’t want to hear. If we say we are hurting because we were raised by same-sex parents, we are either ignored or labeled a hater.

 

[mudwhistle]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The 1st Amendment only prevents the federal government from making laws for or against religious freedom. The decision to use the 14th Amendment to allow same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it didn't allow complete freedom for everyone, the freedom for anyone to marry anyone or anything. This decision is a complete sham.

Throwing somebody in jail for not accepting this unconstitutional decision should be prohibited as well. But our court system has been taken over by the gay agenda.

 

[Seawytch]

The Supreme Court is wrong...

... the Constitution says nothing about the status of marriage...

... therefore they have nothing within their jurisdiction to base their decision on...

... until legislation is passed - then and only then can they rule on the Constitutionality of the legislation one way or the other...

... it is not in their purview to legislate laws...

... especially since, at present, sexual orientation is not a protected class.

That there is a fundamental right to marriage has been established. There have been no less than four supreme court cases where marriage was declared a fundamental right.

And while sexual orientation isn't a protected class at the Federal level, it is in some states.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

"Cancel My subscription to the Resurrection"

 

[Seawytch]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The 1st Amendment only prevents the federal government from making laws for or against religious freedom. The decision to use the 14th Amendment to allow same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it didn't allow complete freedom for everyone, the freedom for anyone to marry anyone or anything. This decision is a complete sham.

Throwing somebody in jail for not accepting this unconstitutional decision should be prohibited as well. But our court system has been taken over by the gay agenda.

My civil marriage license doesn't infringe on your religion in any way shape or form. Kim Davis was actually trying to impose her religious views on her secular office...you're down with that kind of Sharia law shit?

 

[Seawytch]

Excellent post. I agree. Yes, they should be jailed and the justices of the Supreme Court should be in jail too. It is a wicked bunch and I am believing God for His judgment to fall on them and everyone else who was behind it. I pray God's judgment is swift and powerful and that all those who witness it depart from evil and begin to fear the LORD.

Hey, guy, maybe some of us don't believe in your God and don't want to live in a theocracy.

Has that ever occurred to you?

Here's an idea. If you don't like gay marriage, don't have one!

If you don't like guns Joe, don't buy one.

Winner winner chicken dinner.

-Geaux

And if you don't like gays don't suck a dick.

I totally agree with this.

And I think this government should just get out of the marriage business entirely. I think this probably is where government uses marriage as a way of social engineering. It used to link it with raising families.

By making gay marriage socially acceptable, it makes it legitimate in the public eyes as a tool for "family," and thus the adoption and raising of children. This then becomes just as acceptable, say in custody hearings where a father/step-mother vs. mother/step-mother scenario might come into play. Most common sense folks instinctively know which environment is better to raise a child. However our brainwashing pseudo-intellectual socio-engineers would have us believe reality is something other than it is. Most of us are rebelling against this notion, regardless of religion.

Dear Gay Community: Your Kids Are Hurting
I loved my mom’s partner, but another mom could never have replaced the father I lost.
Dear Gay Community: Your Kids Are Hurting

Why Can’t Gay People’s Kids Be Honest?

Gay marriage doesn’t just redefine marriage, but also parenting. It promotes and normalizes a family structure that necessarily denies us something precious and foundational. It denies us something we need and long for, while at the same time tells us that we don’t need what we naturally crave. That we will be okay. But we’re not. We’re hurting.

If anyone can talk about hard things, it’s us.

Kids of divorced parents are allowed to say, “Hey, mom and dad, I love you, but the divorce crushed me and has been so hard. It shattered my trust and made me feel like it was my fault. It is so hard living in two different houses.” Kids of adoption are allowed to say, “Hey, adoptive parents, I love you. But this is really hard for me. I suffer because my relationship with my first parents was broken. I’m confused and I miss them even though I’ve never met them.”

But children of same-sex parents haven’t been given the same voice. It’s not just me. There are so many of us. Many of us are too scared to speak up and tell you about our hurt and pain, because for whatever reason it feels like you’re not listening. That you don’t want to hear. If we say we are hurting because we were raised by same-sex parents, we are either ignored or labeled a hater.

Oh please...regurgitated bullshit. This has already been panned 12 ways to Sunday.

We had children before we could marry. Why don't you want our children to have married parents?

 

[mudwhistle]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The 1st Amendment only prevents the federal government from making laws for or against religious freedom. The decision to use the 14th Amendment to allow same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it didn't allow complete freedom for everyone, the freedom for anyone to marry anyone or anything. This decision is a complete sham.

Throwing somebody in jail for not accepting this unconstitutional decision should be prohibited as well. But our court system has been taken over by the gay agenda.

My civil marriage license doesn't infringe on your religion in any way shape or form. Kim Davis was actually trying to impose her religious views on her secular office...you're down with that kind of Sharia law shit?

As long as any person is unable to marry whomever they wish....this is basically a law that was written by the Supreme Court, which is unconstitutional.

The only reason it made it this far is because the Gay Agenda had to lie and claim that they weren't being discriminatory. Discriminatory against marrying inside your own family or marrying regardless of the age or species of the parties.

 

[bodecea]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The Supreme Court was wrong.

Marriage always has been, and always will be, between a man and a woman. To call anything else a marriage does not make it so, and only makes a sick mockery of genuine marriage.

There is nothing in the Constitution which allows or supports the outrageous attempt to redefine marriage to include sick mockeries thereof; and in any case, such a redefinition is nonsense, just as if the court had ruled that a rotifer is an elephant.

So...you wish to force your interpretation onto the rest of the country. Cool...

 

[JoeB131]

If I still had kids at home, I would protect my children form vulgar displays of evil

Parents don't let their kids watch pornography. Having it right next door requires parenting as well

I have a lot of gay friends, and NONE of them have ever had sex in front of me.

So I'm not sure why you think that gays living next door to you would be like a porn movie.

Or why you think not giving them marriage licenses would make them not gay.

On the other hand, as I have said before, my next door neighbor once shot his gun out his patio window in a failed suicide attempt, sending a bullet flying across the parking lot where it could have potentially hit one of the neighborhood kids.

So while you have failed to make an anti-gay marriage argument, you've made a pretty successful anti gun argument.

 

[Seawytch]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The 1st Amendment only prevents the federal government from making laws for or against religious freedom. The decision to use the 14th Amendment to allow same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it didn't allow complete freedom for everyone, the freedom for anyone to marry anyone or anything. This decision is a complete sham.

Throwing somebody in jail for not accepting this unconstitutional decision should be prohibited as well. But our court system has been taken over by the gay agenda.

My civil marriage license doesn't infringe on your religion in any way shape or form. Kim Davis was actually trying to impose her religious views on her secular office...you're down with that kind of Sharia law shit?

As long as any person is unable to marry whomever they wish....this is basically a law that was written by the Supreme Court, which is unconstitutional.

The only reason it made it this far is because the Gay Agenda had to lie and claim that they weren't being discriminatory. Discriminatory against marrying inside your own family or marrying regardless of the age or species of the parties.

So Loving was also unconstitutional. Have you told all the interracial couples?

Look, if you think there is no demonstrable harm in marrying your sibling, your dog (can't consent), a child (can't consent), a dead person (can't consent) or more than one person, you are free to do just as gay and interracial couples did and petition the courts. Somehow I don't think you'll fare as well with many of your hyperbolic nonsense...but have fun storming the castle.

 

[mudwhistle]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The Supreme Court was wrong.

Marriage always has been, and always will be, between a man and a woman. To call anything else a marriage does not make it so, and only makes a sick mockery of genuine marriage.

There is nothing in the Constitution which allows or supports the outrageous attempt to redefine marriage to include sick mockeries thereof; and in any case, such a redefinition is nonsense, just as if the court had ruled that a rotifer is an elephant.

So...you wish to force your interpretation onto the rest of the country. Cool...

Obviously you have forced your interpretation on the rest of the country. 10 years ago this wasn't even worth considering. Now the media has not only made it into an idea, but a reality. This is how propaganda works.

Its on thing to give someone the right to do this. Quite another thing when you start throwing people in jail and taking away their freedom.

 

[bodecea]

Excellent post. I agree. Yes, they should be jailed and the justices of the Supreme Court should be in jail too. It is a wicked bunch and I am believing God for His judgment to fall on them and everyone else who was behind it. I pray God's judgment is swift and powerful and that all those who witness it depart from evil and begin to fear the LORD.

Hey, guy, maybe some of us don't believe in your God and don't want to live in a theocracy.

Has that ever occurred to you?

Here's an idea. If you don't like gay marriage, don't have one!

If you don't like guns Joe, don't buy one.

Winner winner chicken dinner.

-Geaux

Don't like gay marriage, don't have one.

Winner winner, chicken dinner.

 

[bodecea]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The Supreme Court was wrong.

Marriage always has been, and always will be, between a man and a woman. To call anything else a marriage does not make it so, and only makes a sick mockery of genuine marriage.

There is nothing in the Constitution which allows or supports the outrageous attempt to redefine marriage to include sick mockeries thereof; and in any case, such a redefinition is nonsense, just as if the court had ruled that a rotifer is an elephant.

So...you wish to force your interpretation onto the rest of the country. Cool...

Obviously you have forced your interpretation on the rest of the country. 10 years ago this wasn't even worth considering. Now the media has not only made it into an idea, but a reality. This is how propaganda works.

Its on thing to give someone the right to do this. Quite another thing when you start throwing people in jail and taking away their freedom.

Really? We are forcing you to have a gay marriage? When's the date?

 

[JoeB131]

As long as any person is unable to marry whomever they wish....this is basically a law that was written by the Supreme Court, which is unconstitutional.

The only reason it made it this far is because the Gay Agenda had to lie and claim that they weren't being discriminatory. Discriminatory against marrying inside your own family or marrying regardless of the age or species of the parties.

There's a good reason to prevent incestuous marriages, as they can produce genetically damaged children. Still, despite that, a lot of states allow you to marry your first cousin.

children and animals can't make informed consent, and therefore can't enter into a marriage contract.

So here's a crazy idea, guy. Instead of telling me why gay marriage is bad by comparing it to something else that no one is actually advocating for, how about telling us why gay marriage is bad?

Arguments that don't count- "I think it's icky" and "My Imaginary Friend in the Sky thinks it's wrong."

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The Supreme Court was wrong.

Marriage always has been, and always will be, between a man and a woman. To call anything else a marriage does not make it so, and only makes a sick mockery of genuine marriage.

There is nothing in the Constitution which allows or supports the outrageous attempt to redefine marriage to include sick mockeries thereof; and in any case, such a redefinition is nonsense, just as if the court had ruled that a rotifer is an elephant.

So...you wish to force your interpretation onto the rest of the country. Cool...

Obviously you have forced your interpretation on the rest of the country. 10 years ago this wasn't even worth considering. Now the media has not only made it into an idea, but a reality. This is how propaganda works.

Its on thing to give someone the right to do this. Quite another thing when you start throwing people in jail and taking away their freedom.

They use to say "no miscegenation" ...they used to sell Negroes at the market...time passes things change...know what I mean Vern?

 

[JimH52]

This is a difficult one. I think she has every right to refuse to issue the marriage license herself, due to religious beliefs. But she should step aside and allow her deputies to issue them, if they have no objection. That is true, whether you believe as she does or not. Her name being on the license should have no bearing on whether she issues them or not. If she has a problem with her name on the form, she should cross it out.

No person should be forced to do something that basically goes against their conscious.

 

[mudwhistle]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The 1st Amendment only prevents the federal government from making laws for or against religious freedom. The decision to use the 14th Amendment to allow same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it didn't allow complete freedom for everyone, the freedom for anyone to marry anyone or anything. This decision is a complete sham.

Throwing somebody in jail for not accepting this unconstitutional decision should be prohibited as well. But our court system has been taken over by the gay agenda.

My civil marriage license doesn't infringe on your religion in any way shape or form. Kim Davis was actually trying to impose her religious views on her secular office...you're down with that kind of Sharia law shit?

As long as any person is unable to marry whomever they wish....this is basically a law that was written by the Supreme Court, which is unconstitutional.

The only reason it made it this far is because the Gay Agenda had to lie and claim that they weren't being discriminatory. Discriminatory against marrying inside your own family or marrying regardless of the age or species of the parties.

So Loving was also unconstitutional. Have you told all the interracial couples?

Look, if you think there is no demonstrable harm in marrying your sibling, your dog (can't consent), a child (can't consent), a dead person (can't consent) or more than one person, you are free to do just as gay and interracial couples did and petition the courts. Somehow I don't think you'll fare as well with many of your hyperbolic nonsense...but have fun storming the castle.

One can argue that same-sex couples have drawbacks as well. You want to say that your situation is totally different from everyone else's. Whose the real bigot here?

My mother told me that I wouldn't be happy marrying my wife, who is 18 years older and African-American, but I didn't listen. We've been married for over 37 years. Used to be everyone stared at us, but not any more. We still have to tell cashiers and waitresses we're together.

 

[JoeB131]

Kids of divorced parents are allowed to say, “Hey, mom and dad, I love you, but the divorce crushed me and has been so hard. It shattered my trust and made me feel like it was my fault. It is so hard living in two different houses.” Kids of adoption are allowed to say, “Hey, adoptive parents, I love you. But this is really hard for me. I suffer because my relationship with my first parents was broken. I’m confused and I miss them even though I’ve never met them.”

But children of same-sex parents haven’t been given the same voice. It’s not just me. There are so many of us. Many of us are too scared to speak up and tell you about our hurt and pain, because for whatever reason it feels like you’re not listening. That you don’t want to hear. If we say we are hurting because we were raised by same-sex parents, we are either ignored or labeled a hater.

i think if you are over 18 and still whining about your parents, you need to get over yourself.

There are a lot of straight couples that are lousy parents, and a lot of gay couples who are great parents.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Constitution (Amendment 1) says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

And the 14th amendment said that what applied to the Fed govt, now applies to state and local govts too. Meaning, no govt can make a law as described by the 1st amendment.

A basic tenet of many religions in this country is that homosexuality is a sin, and is forbidden. That was true in George Washington's time, and is just as true now.

If Congress makes a law saying that people (such as county clerks) must accept a homosexual same-sex "marriage", hasn't Congress (and/or the county govt of Rowan County, Kentucky) violated the 1st amendment?

Why did they jail Kim Davis? Sounds like they should have jailed the Congressmen (or county govt officials) who voted for the law instead, and possibly the affirming justices of the Supreme Court too.

The 1st Amendment only prevents the federal government from making laws for or against religious freedom. The decision to use the 14th Amendment to allow same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it didn't allow complete freedom for everyone, the freedom for anyone to marry anyone or anything. This decision is a complete sham.

Throwing somebody in jail for not accepting this unconstitutional decision should be prohibited as well. But our court system has been taken over by the gay agenda.

Does your country have a Constitution, expert?

The Supreme Court made an unconstitutional decision? lol, which governmental body reviews SCOTUS decisions for constitutionality?

 

[Freewill]

Davis is wrong:

“The interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment enunciated by this Court in the Brown case is the supreme law of the land, and Art. VI of the Constitution makes it of binding effect on the States "any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." P.358 U. S. 18.

No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his solemn oath to support it. P. 358 U. S. 18.”

Cooper v. Aaron (1958)

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Article VI, US Constitution

And the Supreme Court is correct:

“The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry.”

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)

That was not gay marriage they were ruling on. I am thinking at the time if it were suggested that this ruling had anything to do with gay marriage they wouldn't even know what the hell you were talking about.