Sunday, March 05, 2006

If the 2nd Amendment protects private ownership of...

...magazine-loaded rifles, why doesn't the 14th Amendment protect marriages between two men or two women?

Amendment XIV of the Constitution, Section 1, reads, in part: "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 the jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Doubtless at some point, on a matter different from the current marriage debate, the Supreme Court held that since the 14th Amendment was debated specifically to protect the rights of newly-freed slaves especially in the South, the Amendment must be narrowly construed in application in subsequent matters.

That argument rather sounds like the Clintonesque "it depends on what is is."

Would anyone debate the 2nd Amendment's 1789 context as not being applicable to 2006? Who, exactly, would be in favor of private ownership of bazookas?

Sphere: Related Content

1 comment:

  1. Pardon the intrusion....

    You can put another one up for the big "O" with brassiere. Hey, sometimes one can not be bothered with details... just get to the point. :)

    I think I've become an over-night blog voyeur. --->off to peek on some other unsuspecting blogger