Anyway, the documenting part, right. Here's part of that CBN interview he did last week, getting some much-needed attention.
Where marriage is adjudicated, whether it’s at the federal level or at the state level, we’ve always had marriage certificates and we’ve had them at the state level. If we keep it that way, maybe we can still have the discussion go on without make the decision go all the way one way or all the way the other way.
I think right now if we say we’re only going to have a federally mandated one-man, one-woman marriage, we’re going to lose that battle because the country is going the other way right now. If we were to say each state can decide, I think a good 25, 30 states still do believe in traditional marriage, and maybe we allow that debate to go on for another couple of decades and see if we can still win back the hearts and minds of people.
Substitute "slavery" for "traditional marriage" in that sentence (and 15 for the number of states backing it) and this asshole would fit in perfectly in proto-Confederate 1853 South. It's the same damn argument, and used for the same damn purposes it was used for 160 years ago.
Same damn party it seems, too.