[Hoodat]

I was relying on the actual wording of the Constitution instead of an interpretation of that wording given us by the same body that gave us Plessy v. Ferguson and Roe v. Wade.

I know where your interpretation came from, I just don't agree with that interpretation since there is no Constitutional basis for it.

[Lucky Dog]

I was relying on the actual wording of the Constitution instead of an interpretation of that wording given us by the same body ...

That body to which you refer is charged under the very document upon which you are relying with the authority and responsibility to interpret that document.

I just don't agree with that interpretation since there is no Constitutional basis for it.

It is certainly your privilege to disagree. That body has on past occasions reversed itself. However, such reversals have seldom occurred after multiple cases challenging a particular legal premise have been held invalid under the same, or very similar, legal reasoning. Such is the case regarding the application of the Fourteenth Amendment. In particular, such is the situation with specific challenges to the freedom of religion principle.