In this video it seems that CNN's Chris Cumo takes an offense to the application of law as defined by Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore over the issue of Alabama's right to reject same sex marriage.
The Declaration Of Independence says:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
The word "Unalienable means "incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred." Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:
This is often confused with the word "inalienable" or "inalienable rights". The word "Inalienable" or "inalienable rights" would mean "rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights." Morrison v. State, Mo. App., 252 S.W.2d 97, 101.
The founding Fathers recognized the rights of a human being as being "Unalienable", meaning that these could not be summarily taken by the state or even given away or sold away. These rights always exist as long as an individual is a human being. As I have quoted in THIS POST and repost again here:
"In other words our personal freedoms and the right to live religiously free is not a chess piece of compromise as it pertains to the rights of others. Neither are our religious freedoms granted or conferred to us by the state or government. Thinking to the contrary is more in line with socialist and communist lines of thought on freedoms, rather than in line with true fundamental American values. As a side note, I believe that we need to understand the difference between INALIENABLE rights and UNALIENABLE rights because they are often spoken of as one in the same. " ~ The Dunamis Word 'Spiritual Seduction. Subdued By Gay Rights' Pastor H. Burnett 5/5/2012
Our rights are only "secured" by the Government, not granted by the government through consensus and or compromise as Cumo states. His values are certainly socialistic as it pertains to that issue.
In addition, I cannot think of an instance in which sexuality is not a moral issue as opposed to the human rights issue that people have exalted it to be. If sex is a human rights issue, as these folk and others who are tremendously deceived claim it to be, we can be sure that every others sexual arrangement and desire will be on the block shortly. This is a sad truth and the result and failure of arguments like Cumo's.