Nov 19 2008
Semantics, Sex, and the Constitution
I don’t know why but the fact that any group is denied basic civil rights over what kind of sex they like (I mean really, homosexuals are doing what most straight people I know do…and how would you like it if the government told you you couldn’t get married because of what you liked to do at home with you beloved? Hmm? tell me?) just irks me no end so I was looking at the Constitution trying to figure out if I had a reason to be pissed. I thought, hey, maybe I’m off base…so I’ll check it out.
Amendment 10:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
Ok….I’ll give you that on the surface that makes it look like a state’s rights issue what with the reserved to the states bit BUT there is also that to the people bit…I know popular election puts it in the hands of the people. Don’t worry I’m way ahead of you…
Amendment 9
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Hmm…that pesky people bit again
Amendment 14 Section 1
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherin they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United State; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Several things to notice here…the word privileges for one. People talk about marriage being a privilege and not a right…I got your privileges ;) The rest of it pretty much says to me you aren’t allowed to screw with privileges or rights….so no matter which side of the fence you go down on (privilege or right) marriage is covered. Marriage is definitely one or the other and the government is definitely involved (otherwise we wouldn’t change tax status for married couples and we wouldn’t charge for marriage licenses or divorces or any of the other ways that the government screws with a ‘married’ couples money)
Now for the semantics bit. Maybe we all just need to use different words…words are powerful and evoke powerful reactions in people. I’ll even give you that various religions (see I’m not even going to nitpick that religion was used as government for the longest time) have a claim on the word marriage. So let’s not regulate marriage…
Let’s regulate something called cohabitation….or a civil union… or some other term that won’t rile people up. I think it is kind of how some women get pissed if they are called a whore or a bitch. Neither word is (usually) accurate so they aren’t upset at the actual definition (she isn’t really a female dog) but more the emotion it evokes (I mean….logically if you aren’t taking money for sex and someone calls you a whore why would you be upset? …heck if you are taking money for sex and someone calls you a whore why would you be upset?) Being a bit random, sorry.
My point is…the government is regulating cohabitation at the moment and by making laws that prohibit consenting adults from enjoying the legal benefits of cohabitation they are denying said consenting adults of their Constitutional right of “equal protection of the laws”
Now if you still think people should be denied those Constitutional rights, please….lay it out for me and back it up with a legal reason. I’m not interested in what your religion has to say about my sex life or anyone else’s sex life. That concerns you…not my government….so legal defenses only. 
I agree with you. I think you are right on, and it’s a very well-written article!
Your basically saying that the Government is telling people that they cant be gay. Thats just nonsense. No one is saying that all the people are saying that they are opposed to gay marriage because it offends them and they would like to keep marriage between a man and a woman because thats the relationship that marriage constitutes. If you dont agree with that thats fine but to say its taking away from their civil rights thats nonsense. Give gay couples the same rights as married couples and its fine. But gays wanted to be accepted in main stream society and they want to act like what there doing isnt wrong, and saying that if you dont agree with them thats hate. Why cant people understand that homosexuality is offensive to most Americans and they just dont want to hear about it anymore. The gays are just using the excuse of civil rights so they dont have to feel guilty about thier immorality…..I keep it Rude…
Currently 63% of Americans have no problems whatsoever with the gay community. That number comes from a Rasmussen/Fox News poll taken Nov. 9-12 2008. So the commenter above is mistaken when he/she says that the majority of Americans think “homosexuality is offensive to most Americans and they just dont[sic] want to hear about it anymore.”
The only people raising an issue with this are the people that are trying to turn this country into a theocracy, and while they may certainly be loud, they are in the minority.
Have you checked out the guy’s blog? Fifty bucks says he’s still in middle school.
@eclectic I’m so with you about that 63%!
@David, how interesting that you have deleted your posts and now just have youtube videos. Of course the comments from both Bill and myself didn’t agree with your view, but that’s part of what a blog is about - learning what other people think.