[The Urban Sombrero]

No now if I used Hare Krishna to re-interpret the Constitution I'd be using religion, then I'd be in the same revisionist boat with the La-La's. I look at the truth of man's creation in the same manner as did the Framers, who were careful to detail as much in the founding documents. Godly truth is even more viable than scientific truth, because we don't have to worry about It's accuracy. Scientific truths tend to evolve, as knowledge increases. With obeyance to Christian principles comes well being, as the Founders clearly proclaimed.

I never said equal protection did not apply to all, I said the group in question already enjoyed equal protection under the law prior to the repeal of DADT. And for the unfortunate tens of millions of aborted innocents who came along after Roe v Wade, equal protection flew right out the windows of the Supreme Court.

I would further say that your effort to stake out a usurper's claim on moral high ground is what is illogical. And where circular logic is concerned, let's at least do one little touch and go off of reality here, the La-La's invented circular logic. But then, when did you ever use your own material, right?

Let's be clear: your claim is that marriage does not fall into an "equal protection" category. Then, you jump to a, "therefore" and state same sex couples have no protected right to marry. If you cannot see that you continually assert what you have yet to prove, it is because of interpretational blindness, and at least a touch of hubris.