To the editor:
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun, architect of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Decision said: "that if the fetus was defined as a person for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment, then the fetus would have a specific right to life under that Amendment."
Science completely validates the child in the womb as a person with it's own brain waves, heart beat fingerprints and of course, it's identifying DNA - all different from the parents. So why not just call them legal persons so they can be protected from having their little limbs pulled off and heads crushed? The issue is "IDENTITY," which would thereby give them constitutional protection; a "right to life."
The issue of a constitutional right to marry someone of the same sex, also hinges on the "identity issue." I interpret the motive of those pushing "same sex marriage" as this: "We were born as homosexuals, we can do nothing to change it, therefore we must have a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex; and some of us want to call it marriage, others of us do not want a marriage contract - but that doesn't matter, we insist that the traditional definition of marriage must be changed."
But in reality, how do you identify the "homosexual?" Research tells us there are no innate properties in our DNA that identify the homosexual. DNA will tell us your skin color, eye color, hair color, bone density, etc. But the only identifying characteristic we currently have for the homosexual is based solely on behavior, and this "behavior" can be completely reversed, as verified by narth.com, and "ex-homosexual" groups as like Exodus International, Courage Apostolate and ex-gaytruth.com. In other words there is no solid identifier to put into that "constitutional right" to a same sex marriage, it just floats in and out of existence. The Australian Human Rights Commission says there are 23 genders; will we need to redefine marriage to accommodate all 23?
To fully understand the amazingly successful advancement of this issue over the last 25 years, one needs to review the six steps in Kirk & Madsen's 1987 "Overhauling of Straight America' and it's 1989 follow up, "After the Ball"-essentially the "bible" of the homosexual movement. Page 153 says: "We mean conversion of the average American's emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media." Among other things, the steps deal with neutralizing "Joe Sixpack" and demonizing the religious right using the "bracket technique." In other words, the movement is not based on intellectual argument; only emotional manipulation of the public.
In response to letters addressing the military side of this issue (all one sided); please read the 1993 statement from the late Col. John W. Ripley, at tinyurl.com/5rnrpqr. As captain of 3/3 Lima company in Vietnam 1966-67 he led his Marines from the front. During his tour he lost his company three times over, killed and wounded in fire fights; including 13 lieutenants killed and all his corpsmen.