Ok, on this I think we can all agree: None of you are Constitutional scholars. I have dabbled in Constitutional Law here & there, but I can reassure you that NONE of you are reading the Constitution "correctly." Why? Because welcome to our biggest issue as a country: Our US Constitution is constantly being fought over by formalists v. functionalists: is it a document that should be confined to it's 4 borders & read most literally word by word, or is it a living document that should reflect us as a society & the changes we make over the course of time. This is an issue that Constitutional Law Scholars debate as issue after issue that wasn't "written into" the Constitution appears on the forefront of the political arena. It also is an argument that comes up even when it's regarding an issue that IS written into the Constitution--you would be surprised at how vague our little document truely is.

My point is this: Rather then argue about the Constitution, which, unless I am mistaken none of you are experts in, why not just keep to the topic & discuss the notion of Marriage.

Just FYI, marriage itself isn't written in as a fundamental right in the Constitution. However, it has been understood that over time, our judiciary (specifically the US Supreme Court) has interpreted some things to be "undersood" to be fundamental rights or liberty interests. These include the right to marry, the right to raise your children, etc. etc.

And a second FYI, the 14th Amendment is generally considered "the states" amendment--it takes the Constitution & makes it applicable to the states--it's a federalism issue.


Just my two cents since I have been reading the thread from the start.

[On a side note, I would also encourage folks to debate the ISSUES, not eachother... This is a good thread, let's not have it hijacked by personal opinions being interpreted as fact...]