Replies

Then they’ll contrive a “Plessy v. Ferguson” of sorts over bathrooms, clothing, ladies night any thing or word that has gender specific elements.

"once marriage is no longer recognized as the union of one man and one woman, there is no legal or logical stopping point"

I want to marry my mother, son, dog and this here banana.

Why not?

Thank you for referencing that article Kaslin. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

What is the big deal concerning the constitutionality of state laws prohibiting gay marriage? I think that the corrupt judicial system is trying to promote gay marriage by taking advantage of low-information voters who have never been taught about 10th Amendment-protected state powers versus constitutionally unprotected “rights."

Politically correct interpretations of the 14th Amendment’s (14A) Equal Protections Clause (EPC) by pro-gay activist judges aside, since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect so-called gay rights, gay marriage in this case, there is nothing in the Constitution stopping the states from prohibiting gay marriage.

Regarding PC interpretations of the EPC, activist judges are ignoring that the Supreme Court has historically clarified that the 14A did not add new protections to the Constitution. It only strengthens those protections which the states have amended the Constitution to expressly protect.

“3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had [emphasis added].” —Minor v. Happersett, 1874.

In fact, the Court’s statement reflect’s the official clarification of John Bingham in the congressional record, Bingham having been the main author of Section 1 of 14A where the EPC is found.

“Mr. Speaker, this House may safely follow the example of the makers of the Constitution and the builders of the Republic, by passing laws for enforcing all the privileges and immunities of the United States as guaranteed by the amended Constitution and expressly enumerated in the Constitution [emphasis added].” — Congressional Globe, House of Representatives, 42nd Congress, 1st Session. (See lower half of third column.)

Again, since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect gay “rights,” the corrupt judicial system has no constitutionally enumerated gay protections to apply to the states via 14A to stop the states from prohibiting gay marriage.

In other words, corrupt judges are trying to take advantage of widespread ignorance of the Constitution by wrongly trying to establish gay “rights” outside the framework of the Constitution.

I wish I thought he were right. Instead, I expect the end of marriage to be greeted with an indifferent shrub—among those who even bother to notice and aren’t joining in the celebration.