The 14th Amendment Of The United States Constitution & Homosexuality

2 Thess. 2: 7-12 ~  "7-For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8-And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9-Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10-And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11-And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12-That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

Since the 14th Amendment, especially the "equal protection clause" is currently the basis of the argument in favor of homosexual marriage and eventually other extended homosexual rights, I thought it good to at least share what the amendment says and extend debate over how it should be applied and how I believe it has been misapplied within the current US legal system.

The United States Constitution

1st, the 14th Amendment is subtitled "Citizenship Rights". There are 3 primary clauses in this amendment, The Citizenship Clause, Due Process Clause, Equal Protection Clause and the Incorporation or how the amendment will be applied, which is set forth in the amendment itself. Here is the text:

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 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.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Issues That Must Be Addressed

Under the current interpretaton of the 14th Amendment, especially as set forth by Judge Vaughn Walker, one should ask that if the application of equal protection under the law is held to be something that homosexuals should benefit from, why then are not those who engage in the sexual choices of bigamy, polygamy, polyamory, pedophilia or any other sexual arrangement that is generally considered to be deviant, NOT protected under the law?

Now, a case could be made that that it is because many of the practices I named above, such as pedophilia, are currently illegal, whereas homosexuality is not (in general). Therefore, homosexuality should be given a pass. However, that arguement is in itself a smoke-screen...Sodomy, which is a general practice of male homosexual behavior, was, itself also outlawed for much of American history. In fact it is still against the law in Texas. Obviously, the court, in some cases,  currently deems such practices as legal and covered under the 14 Amendment. So to claim that because a practice is "illegal" that it shouldn't  come under the protections of the 14th Amendment, does not appear to make a sound legal argument, in my view, which supports the way the legal exception is currently being applied toward homosexuality and homosexual practices and unions.

So, that reverts back to the original argument. If Judge Vaughn's application of law, and President Barack Obama's application of law and many liberal Constitutional scholar's application of the law is viable, why is the homosexual class now a "favored" sexual class? In other words, homosexuality, under their rubric, becomes a preferred class and that poiton violates the 14th Amendment. Please remember that I AM NOT a lawyer, but this is a conundrum that I would like to banter through with somone who is.

The Problem

With these things in minds it becomes crystal clear to me that the 14th Amendment clause of "equal protection" IN NO WAY should be made to apply to sexual orientation or preferred sexual practice no matter what that practice may be.

WHY?

ALL sexual practice is a CHOICE. No matter how strongly one is compelled to act, it all boils down to CHOICE. RACE or being black or white IS NOT a choice. It is the way that someone appears and that appearance, (as being born from the womb) is beyond an individuals choice.  

Thus the distinction. I believe that what we are being sold, by legal gerrymandering, smart secular lawyers and misapplication and twisting of the law, is that homosexuality is an "equally protected" class because of sexual preference. Until I am corrected in this I believe that there is and remains no justification in any way shape or form for such notion. Therefore this issue, unlike civil rights, should be a matter of states rights and not covered under federally enacted mandates pertaining to civil rights.

The Fast Track To Confusion

Once ANY sexual activity, not based on an obvious and evidential natural structure such as heterosexual sexual activity is favored legally, then the flood-gate MUST be opened to all sexual practices and forms, no matter how distasteful they may be. The fact remains, that NO PERSON living in this present world came into it as a result of a homosexual union. In other words, the empirically verifiable and scientific facts clearly display that 2 sperm or 2 ovum by themselves do not produce any offspring. Therefore, it can be naturally observed that heterosexuality is the natural order of things within this world, or else the human species would cease to exist.

The critic will aptly point to species that undergo spontaneous sexual changes under certain circumstances, such as lizards in their eggs under extreme pressures to state that dual sex organisms exist within the natural creation. The fact is clear however, that this type of change is not the norm, neither do humans experience such changes without the assistance of drugs and chemically induced aids. Further, other type of individuals, such as hermaphrodites are exceptions, not the norm. So to apply and extend the 14th Amendment to sexual preferences and choices, is by far and large a stretch of both legal integrity and the imagination.

Conclusion

Strong delusion has been given and applied by men seeking to justify evil. To the left and right there is unrighteousness and it can easily and readily be said that the things acceptable with and among men are rejected of God. It is one thing to practic or lve like a person feels that they should. I don't think that a homosexual should bear the burden of "living in the closet". In that case all I can offer is the love and compassion of Christ and an extended hand of assistance saying that there is a better way, and that way is in Christ Jesus.

If I have any fear, it is the fer that man has sought to exalt themselves and make wrong right and right wrong. This is playing on the mercy of God. When God's mercy is exhausted, there will be a permanent change and that change will be without exception, political favor or legal interpretation. God will certainly speak.

Blessed!