Friday, August 06, 2010

The Will Of The People


Apparently the will of the people means absolutely nothing in the Communist state of California. The people voted twice --- twice to make the rule of marriage between a “Male” and a “Female” the natural order of things…

By de Andréa

In light of the recent ruling by the court to strike down the California law Prop 8, I felt it necessary to clear up a few fine points of existing law, something the courts totally ignore these days. The courts clearly don’t enforce the law they violate it, recreate, and redefine it.

The other factor that know one seems to want to address, is that the San Francisco judge that has no regard for the law, is guess what? Yes, GAY! But of course, that couldn’t have biased his decision now could it? Naw! But doesn’t this make this judge an advocate rather than a judge?

As for using the 14th Amendment and the so-called equal protection clause, yes I agree everyone has equal rights. But do we have an inalienable God given ‘right’ to marry, or is it a government privilege with rules. It may be both!

The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment:
“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 [‘not rights’] 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.”
(Emphasis mine)

While I recognize that America is a “Free Country” with equal rights, the equal protection clause first, clearly refers to privileges not rights. The 14th Amendment is about laws, not rights!
Rights have no rules or laws, not legal ones anyway, that’s why they are called rights instead of privileges. A ‘State’ (meaning the government) cannot legally infringe or regulate a ‘right’ (because they are inalienable, refer to the Second Amendment) but a privilege on the other hand comes from the government with rules, restrictions and or laws.

First the Homosexual community needs to decide whether they want marriage defined as a right or a privilege. If they claim the Fourteenth Amendment, then they must then claim it as a privilege which comes with rules and …“equal protection of the laws.” Guess what? California law says --- marriage is between a man and a woman.

If they claim it is a right then there are no rules or laws and the Fourteenth Amendment doesn’t apply.

If Homosexuals want equal rights then guess what again…the word equal in Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary says “equal” means “the same as”. This then means that Homosexuals have the “same” rights to marriage as “Heterosexuals” which is the right of marriage defined by nature as being between a man and a woman. Homosexuals say they want the same rights as straight people, but what they really mean is they want special rights. And if they admit that marriage is a privilege instead of a right then they would be violating the very Amendment they are standing on, they would then be subject to the same equal (not special or separate) rules, of law that Heterosexuals are subjected to… the law and the definition is ---“Marriage is between a man and a woman”.

So no matter how one dices and slices it, Homosexuals would have to have a special law that addresses just their specific life style, this would be unequal, and therefore unconstitutional according to the 14th Amendments equal protection clause.

If I were to say that Homosexuality is unnatural I would be politically incorrect and in a whole bucket of trouble with Homosexuals, Communists, and anti-American atheists. I would however be a hero of the Muslims. (Not that this is something I aspire to) And yet if I were to attempt to convince someone that Homosexuality is in fact natural, then that would mean that Heterosexuality is unnatural. Moreover, since they are clearly opposites they both cannot be natural, or the same as… So, if everyone naturally became Homosexuals and got married… How long would the human race last before it became extinct? So much for it being natural.

So if Homosexuality is not equal but instead opposed, then how can they demand equal rights or privileges? Equal rights or privileges under the law are something they already have. And the law, that they have an equal right to, is the twice passed California law of ‘Marriage’ between a man and a woman. If Homosexuals are equally subjected to the same law as Heterosexuals as stated in the 14th Amendment then they must obey the law equally.

So did someone force them to be unequal or did they just choose to be special?

You see the 14th Amendment was written not for Homosexuals as they so ignorantly believe, but it was written in 1868 after the civil war to protect the people of the black race who didn’t choose to be anyone but who they are, equal to everyone else.

Homosexuals have chosen to be unequal, not the same as… ‘Special’ they want to be protected by special rules and laws that don’t apply to anyone else, thereby violating the 14th Amendment, rather than the equal rules of Heterosexuals that the amendment provides. So, as you can now so clearly see, they have violated the 14th amendment by their demand for special or unequal rules and laws that govern this human right or privilege.

If this decision is allowed to stand it opens a Pandora’s Box for any group or organization that believes they are special and warrant special rules, laws, and courts. One that comes to mind are the Muslims that are already gaining ground in creating Sharia law and Sharia courts in opposition to the American legal system. Maybe I should have special rules, I mean I am an Op-Ed writer doesn’t that make me special?

I don’t know! It makes sense to me…


de Andréa

No comments: