Prior to the DoMA ruling, the US Supreme Court has held that states must honor marriages from other states EXCEPT in cases where the marriage from another state violates the age of sexual consent law in the current state.

MADE UP EXAMPLE:

A couple in Texas gets married, with parental permission, at 14.  They move to Maine where the sexual age of consent is 16. Maine is allowed to ignore the marriage and treat them as unmarried children.  Once they both turn 16, they can apply to a Maine court to reinstate their marriage.

And going through the morning clippings (on this side of the pond), comes an article asserting that the Pope's comments were not only first made in 2019, but somehow – and honestly, how?! – not brought forth for publication at that time, via the very thin notion that the overall focus of his comments were about different issues.

To which I can only say, "whaaaaa?".  Article:

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/plot-thickens-origins-popes-civil-union-endorsement-73759888?cid=clicksource_4380645_16_hero_headlines_headlines_hed

And, with my own very mixed feelings about the Pope and his church, how was this not noticed by just one truthsayer in the papal communications coterie, as well as the Televisa Mexican media handling the interview, so that more than a year passes before the history-changing remarks truly see the light of day?

Something is not passing the smell test here.  Anyone have more to add?

As an LGBT individual, it really bothered me that the pope voiced support for same sex civil unions. First, separate is not equal. Second, we don’t need permission to get married from the leader of an org. that spent decades covering for and protecting child rapists. He has no moral authority. (Link)

Very rare that religion affects government positively.