Stan Vaughan: Intent of the 14th Amendment and why the US Supreme Court ruling must be shown contempt by all Americans.


As Founding Father Thomas Jefferson so wisely told us, “On EVERY question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution (or Amendments) was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be..invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

Otherwise, we are accepting judicial tyranny.

If there is any doubt as to what the framers of the 14th amendment meant by their words, we can look at the drafting and ratification debates on the amendment.

The drafters clearly stated  their reference as to what rights would be protected would be those  classified by Sir William Blackstone in Blackstone’s Commentaries. These they acknowledged were classified by Blackstone under rights of personal security (life) , rights of personal liberty, and rights of personal property.

Did the US Supreme Court find in Blackstone’s Commentaries a personal right to a so-called ‘gay’ marriage? No they did not. To the contrary, Blackstone specifically defines marriage as that right  solely between one man, and one woman.  Further sodomy is specifically listed not as any personal right, but rather indeed, a most serious crime.

Because the framers of the 14th amendment were unanimous that Blackstone’s Commentaries must be looked to  for what personal rights must be given equal protection to, despite any 5-4 split disputed vote to the contrary, not withstanding the US Supreme Court ruling, it deserves nothing but contempt being nothing but judicial tyranny.

2,727 Comments


    Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 67108864 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 3903488 bytes) in /home/crusade/public_html/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 2132