17th August 2010, 10:39 PM
^The problem with your argument, DJ, is that your view of the 14th gives way to the argument that the Constitution evolves with the times. Such an idea isn't true. If you want the 14th to apply to gays, then you have to have the States ratify the Constitution as they did so many years ago.
Also, your view of the 9th is also off. Your problem with the view of the 9th is that the Bill of Rights does not apply to the states. Why is this? Because the Bill of Rights does not apply to states. The original meaning of the first ten amendments was to protect the people of the States from an over powerful government. As Chief Justice John Marshall stated in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), amendments like the first have no authority or bearing on the policies of the states.
Therefore, the feds have no right getting involved in a matter that is not reserved for them.
Also, your view of the 9th is also off. Your problem with the view of the 9th is that the Bill of Rights does not apply to the states. Why is this? Because the Bill of Rights does not apply to states. The original meaning of the first ten amendments was to protect the people of the States from an over powerful government. As Chief Justice John Marshall stated in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), amendments like the first have no authority or bearing on the policies of the states.
Therefore, the feds have no right getting involved in a matter that is not reserved for them.