[Harry Rex Vonner]

Why didn't the founding fathers just write that we were a Christian nation in any of the founding documents then? Especially the Constitution. Seems like something they would have included if that's their intention.

You can't honestly tell me that the Deists and Freemasons that played the biggest part in our founding had any intentions of one religion trumping all others.

They set up barring of religious tests for political office for a reason as well. I don't need much beyond the opening words of the 1st Amendment to tell myself that Christianity has no place in our government nor does any other religion.

Keep telling yourself that, and keep desperately grasping on to your fairy tale story of what this country was meant to be. I don't need to defend or argue much. Things are going my way after all.

Indeed, "things" are going your way, Motley. Sadly, they are not going the way intended by the framers of the US Constitution. Nor are they going the way of the writers of the Fourteenth Amendment which was adopted as a post-Civil War amendment solely intended to grant full protection and equal rights to blacks and other former slaves.

If those who wrote the constitution and those who wrote the Fourteenth Amendment intended to include homosexual marriage, why was it always a moot issue never remotely considered in the writings, discussion, and findings of the court until a couple of months ago? And, where is "marriage" even mentioned in the constitution? The answer is, of course, that it isn't there directly or indirectly. It clearly fell, with most everything else, under the Tenth Amendment meaning that it was always intended to be a states rights issue decided by each state.

Now, that is the law coming from one who studied constitutional law, practiced constitutional law, and, unlike Obama who was merely a low level lecturer and never a professor, has taught constitutional law.

However, we can agree on one fact. The liberal "interpretation" of the Fourteenth Amendment in the last forty plus years or so has turned this well-intended amendment into a toxic landfill to be dumped on by those seeking "rights" that they cannot legitimately find in the constitution or win by a vote of the electorate.

It never hurts to "enlighten" the "debate" with a few actual true facts from one who actually knows the history of the law. It won't convince the Motleys of the world but I learned long ago that it is usually a waste of time confusing such individuals with the truth. He/She will still hold on to his/her multi-colored flag while the rest of us hold to the actual rule of law intended by our forefathers and foremothers.