Wednesday, August 04, 2010

14 is a good number

As in the Fourteenth Amendment, which reads, as a lawyer would say, in pertinent part,

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 wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; 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.”

Recently, there are some people that want to get rid of that “persons born” part because it includes kids whose parents are illegal. 

As of mid-afternoon, there are a lot of folks perturbed with the due process and equal protection parts as they now, for now, in California, include, the horror, gay people.

Yep, faggots have fundamental rights.  California has to have a compelling interest to treat them unequally.  The District Court Judge didn’t need that, he found that the Proposition 8 law, barring their right to marry, was irrational.  That last will be important as the case moves up the legal food chain.

America is a great place if you are white and couldn’t get a date even if you were gay.  Develop a hue or an unnatural predeliction in the view of the majority, that’s what the number 14 is for.


j said...

I think the problem here is the expansion of the definition of the term 'right'.

Crying foul over abridging of rights is fine as long as the "right" is in fact a right and exists beyond the mind of the alleged victim of said abridgment. Don't believe I have seen the right to marry articulated anywhere. As you have pointed out in the past - rights and privileges are different. You shouldn't have to get a license for a right.

Dave said...

I had a comment for you and Blogger ate it. Maybe later.

The Curmudgeon said...

The very same thing happened to me when I tried to post a comment to your last one yesterday. And I spent time I didn't have to turn it into a post instead.

I appreciate your thoughtful comments -- even if we continue to disagree.

Assuming we've adequately staked out our respective positions, let me ask you this additional question: Whatever happened to the political question doctrine?

Maybe they told me in law school -- but that was over 30 years ago and my imperfect memory seems to recall that there was such a thing once upon a time....

Kim said...

It's all about following the Constitution until the children of illegal immigrants are likely to vote for the opposing party's candidate. Also,whether it's a right or a privilege, what entitles straight people to the privilege of marriage and all of the benefits that it entails?