gbaji wrote:
Now if the federal government actually made it illegal for the states to define marriage differently and provide their own benefits based on that definition, they'd have a states rights case.
Since Massachusetts is responsible for administering some federal benefits, the government is saying "Here, give this to married people... but not the people
you've defined as married because they don't count." Which is in infringement upon Massachusetts's right to determine for itself who is married and who isn't under the licenses issued by county governments under the ultimate authority of the state, not the federal government.
Neither of your examples are very good ones. Schools and highways don't qualify for grants simply be existing, they have to competitively apply for them and meet set criteria. Even two traditional schools may not equally meet the criteria set for a grant. It may be a violation if your state recognized and licensed video game school wasn't allowed to
apply for a grant but until that happens, it's not worth side tracking on. Likewise, a road project grant will specifically state that it's for a roadway with vehicle traffic of X many cars per day, etc. If your cow path qualifies then great. If not, the issue wasn't that you planted a "Gbaji's Highway" sign next to it. Spousal benefits are
not competitive -- you don't have to apply against a thousand other widows/widowers for a piece of your deceased spouse's pension. You get them by virtue of being
married something which, again, has been left to the states to decide the criteria for (which varies beyond gender; states have differing legal marrying ages and rules for marrying first cousins, for instance).
Now, before you jump ahead of yourself, the argument for universal recognition of gay marriage is one rooted in the idea that the Constitution provides for it. If the Supreme Court found that to be true, it would override any determination that the individual states may have made since the Constitution is ultimately the principle document governing the nation.
