You should actually go the majority opinion before you pontificate on it.
DOMA was said in that majority opinion to be unconstituti0onal specifically because of a deprivation of equal liberty under the Due Process clause of 5th Amendment.
The only reference to states rights was the right of states to define the law under state sovereignty, which in fact was nowhere denied by DOMA, with the 10th Amendment "states rights" nowhere being cited as the cause for the ruling. The
Quotes from Kennedy's decision:
"Although Congress has great authority to design laws to fit its own conception of sound national policy, it cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment."
"DOMA's principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal. The principal purpose is to impose inequality, not for other reasons like governmental efficiency. Responsibilities, as well as rights, enhance the dignity and integrity of the person. And DOMA contrives to deprive some couples married under the laws of their State, but not other couples, of both rights and responsibilities."
The references above, and throughout the ruling, presumes same sex couples to be the equivalent of marriage, and ignores that the federal government's recognition of same sex marriage forces other states to recognize that fabricated definition of marriage. That first quote actually shows that presumption of equality in its statement.
In short, the majority opinion does nothing but presume what it wants to conclude, and uses states rights only to justify that redefinition of marriage by the state, which DOMA never denied. But the decision then compels that recognition of the state's definition, not by any states right to compel other states and the federal government to recognize that redefinition, which is your mistaken claim, but by the presumption of that false equivalence made by that state being valid outside the state, and under the Constitution, and then applies the 5th Amendment due process to reach its preordained conclusion, in disregard of the Constitution's intent and the fact of terminology.
The court sidesteps and ignores the entire interest of the Congress in making Doma, inclusive of a majority of Democrats in both houses, to prevent the abuse of the Full Faith and Credit clause, and prohibit any corrupt compulsion put on the other states by the whim of a few. This was nothing but an example of the corruption of the judiciary, and willingness to engage dictation and legislation from the bench, which is what Scalia and others recognized in their scathing dissent.
We are no longer a Republic ruled by law, but an aristocracy ruled by men.
And I'm done responding to you, as your behavior has shown a repeated lack of character, and abuse of your position in order to get an upper hand by inappropriate means. Your repetition of the same arguments and distortions of fact, converting the fact of reproduction originating from heterosexual relationship, into a compulsion to have children, which nowhere is relevant, and reversing cause and effect, have already been dealt with and were gutted elsewhere, hence your need to resort to abuse of position.
