I don't know what the full faith and credit part has to do with it
It is my understanding that FFaC requires states to recognize judgments and legal standings from other states. For one state to purposefully enact laws to NOT recognize a specific standing in a another state that seems to violate the clause. I was just curious as to how the legal argument for doing so goes... "we only recognize what we want to recognize" or what exactly?
Fr_Chuck. I was not asking about the Constitutionality of gay marriage in and of itself (marriage is not a Federal issue at all as you stated), but how states get around the Full Faith and Credit clause with regards to some issues, but not others.
For example Tennessee does not recognize common law marriage unless it was legally recognized in another state first, specifically due to Full Faith and Credit considerations. So even though it is against their statutes, and against their states public policy, they recognize legal standings from other states in this regard.