The totality of the Bill of Rights is based on "moral concerns". So while you're entitled to your opinion on the particular amendment proposed you are not entitled to ignore the obvious.
I do believe the stupidity of 'conservatives' is increasing exponentially. The Bill of Rights is a further list of limitations on the federal government in relation to the citizens of the respective states. What the federal government can do and not do to the citizens. Nothing more. It is not a list of rights that the citizens of the respective states have nor is it a list of limitations on the citizens. As a matter of fact the introduction to the Amendments reads
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;The first attempted legislation that became an Amendment was the 18th (the 13th cannot be considered purely moral as it dealt with individual rights of others). Which was overturned less than 20 years later. I restate. You cannot, nor will not, be able to provide statements from the majority of the Framers (I doubt even one or two) that will advocate legislation of morality (including amending the Constitution) as it pertains to the citizens of the respective states at the federal level. This was intended to be an issue, as are all other issues 'true conservatives' are concerned with, for the separate and sovereign states