[Jhoffa_]

If the same sex act occurs between a man and a woman that occurs between two men or two women, yet the former is legal while the latter is not, that violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I don't agree.

Everyone is equally free to engage in sex with a member of the opposite sex. Likewise, everyone is equally prohibited from engaging in sex with a member of the same sex.

It doesn't say only black people, or only men.. It's everyone, period. The law is universal. (as least the Texas law is worded in this fashion, your mileage may vary elsewhere.. )

Would you consider laws allowing bestiality with sheep but not with goats to be a 14th amendment violation?

[IronJack]

You've created a false analogy. According to your logic, it is acceptable for all people to discriminate against Blacks as long as all people are also free to discriminate against Whites. It is not the universality of the application that is in question here, but the NATURE of the application, which is by its very definition, discriminatory.

Bias is not made more acceptable -- or constitutional -- by being universal. If this law did not single out homosexuals, it could be considered constitutional. But in creating an unequal class of offenders, it creates an inequity under the law, which is specifically forbidden under the Fourteenth Amendment.