Another Conservative View on Thompson
Reformed Chicks Blabbing reports that [tag]James Dobson[/tag] won’t support [tag]Fred Thompson[/tag], with the last straw apparently being his support for a constitutional amendment on gay marriage that falls well short of conservative hopes. I now see what I missed before. Thompson supports an amendment that prevents states from being forced to recognize gay marriages from other states. Social conservatives want to ban gay marriage completely.
I would suggest that federalism is a balance, and that the “full faith and credit” clause is not something that should be done away with lightly. Since one can move freely from state to state, just what is a gay couple married in Massachusetts, for example, supposed to do if work moves them to Alabama? (I resist the suggestion that they flee the country or at least change jobs rather than make such a move!) Nonetheless I find Thompson’s approach far more rational than that of other Republicans.
While not exactly the same as your question about married gay couples, teachers who can teach in one state can’t teach in another state until they fulfill the other states requirements. Same goes for a lot of other professionals such as lawyers. It seems the states have in the past had leeway to restrict activities with their own laws.
Also if you are arguing for federalism, the federal government has DOMA, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman. If you don’t want states making conflicting laws, any state that defines marriage differently would be a problem.