Bush Backs Amendment Banning Same-Sex Marriage

NewsMax.com ^ | 2-24-04 | NewsMax Wires, AP

[Mich0127]

very depressing...they should be removed, and the homosexual judge in San Fransisco should have recused himself...in a perfet world, these judges would be removed from the bench

[Gritty]

Maybe you can answer a question I have on a related subject, which concerns the 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment clearly specifies the rights of individual citizens "to keep and bear arms". Additionally, the "full faith and credit" clause also requires other states to recognize the "official acts and records" of other states.

So, how come North Carolina grants me a CCW license to carry concealed in NC, yet Massachusetts will throw me in jail as a felon for carrying the exact same pistol and NC CCW license in Massachusetts - not recognizing either my official NC license or enumerated rights under the 2nd Amendment?

Why does the "full faith and credit" apparently not apply here when it does for a marriage license? Aren't the situations similar? Even though 38 States specifically do not recognize this sort of "marriage" under the Derense of Marriage Act, we still need an Amendment to close the circle? Is this schizophrenic or am I missing something here?

[Congressman Billybob]

The Second Amendment is, and always has been, the orphan of the Bill of Rights. The US Supreme Court ignored the 2nd, as one by one it used the "Incorporation Doctrine" under the 14th to apply the Bill of Rights to the states.

In theory, the whole US Constitution should be as applicable in state courts as in federal courts. It is, after all, the "supreme Law." However, state courts have neglected the 2nd amendment as aggressively as the federal courts.

As for your specific question about taking CCW permits across state lines, as long as the right to bear arms is not treated as a fundamental right (as intended by the Framers), then it falls into the category of privileges, like driving a car. Once that initial mistake is made, then it becomes no different than the use of different laws concerning automobiles when people drive across state lines.

Bottom line, your point is well taken. But the problem cannot be solved until the 2nd Amendment is given its rightful respect as part of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. Until that happens, any federal or state courts will give short shrift to a Full Faith and Credit Clause argument as you outline it.

John / Billybob

[Gritty]

But the problem cannot be solved until the 2nd Amendment is given its rightful respect as part of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

Thanks for your quick reply, and it makes perfect sense!

I guess I realized what the answer was, but just wanted to hear it confirmed by somebody who probably knows. I have asked the same question numerous times and have either gotten vacant stares or empty "Your Reply" spaces.

It's the old game by those who would re-interpret the Constitution. They are sneakily (and maybe not so sneakily) doing it strictly on their own terms, not the ones the Founding Fathers envisioned. No doubt if these wise men were around today they would at this very moment be accumulating rifle flints, laying up quantities of shot and powder, and heating large barrels of tar to go with the feathers.

Personally, I think we are rapidly approaching the tar and feathers stage, but are still a ways from the shot and powder. But, methinks we'll need a whole lot of feathers before we're through.