The following is a cut-n-paste from another site. This material was written by a man named TONY MARCO. It is an important work, and a very good legal opinion.

Protected Class Status for Gay "Sexual Orientations"Would Destroy the Foundation of Special Class Protections

In the considered opinion of former Colorado Civil Rights Commission Chairman John Franklin, litigation arising from gay special advantage legislation would ruin Colorado's civil rights infrastructure and make satisfactory disposition of legitimate minority complaints nearly impossible. As Franklin has pointed out, under such laws, the very issue of qualification for "gay status" would be insolubly complex. How would gay class status be determined? Simply on the word of a job or contract applicant? After a gay performed homosexually before a panel of civil rights authorities? The first time someone engaged in sex with a member of the same gender -- even accidentally, as in a drunken or drugged encounter? After someone became exclusively gay? For how long? Grant protected class status to the special interest group claiming that status by virtue of gay "sexual orientation" and extraordinary civil rights enforcement complications would ensue. Once gayness was confirmed (whatever the confirmation process) would protected class status and all accompanying entitlements then become retroactive to birth? Would bisexuals be eligible for only half protection, because their "straight" behavior needed no protection? Could a person conceivably be fired based on his/her confession that at a particular moment he/she was not experiencing sexual fantasies on the job?
Would lesbian mothers call for additional entitlements because they were not just lesbians but mothers? Would a disadvantaged black lesbian be entitled to triple protected status benefits the moment she came out of the closet? Retroactive to birth? What if she became a mother? Then became handicapped?

The mind boggles! How would status and entitlements ever be equalized given all these new factors? In light of the extreme affluence of gays relative to the general population (see this study, pp. 12 ff.), what would prevent opportunistic individuals from becoming closet heterosexuals, claiming gay class status in order to secure benefits only available to minorities? The New American reports, from an early-1993 Los Angeles Times article: "Producer-turned-gadfly Julia Phillips says that being a lesbian is such a chic '90s thing in Hollywood that many heterosexual women are actually faking an attraction to women to get ahead in the industry" ("It's Hip to Be "Gay," March 22, 1993, p. 37). On the other hand, how will a person perceived to be gay prove otherwise? A June 2, 1993, Associated Press article reported: "The Marine Corps said Tuesday it will review the case of a man who said he left boot camp 10 years ago after a drill instructor falsely accused him of being gay" ("Ex-Marine left boot camp after being called gay," Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph, p. A-4). For ten years Robert Farley has been unable to prove he isn't gay! What conceivable standard of proof will America's civil rights authorities devise to determine "sexual orientation" with certainty?

In states still maintaining sodomy statutes, the problem of "gay rights" becomes even more acute. "Gay rights" laws cannot be passed with homosexual behavior as their basis, because "gay rights" statutes would plainly represent a condoning of criminal acts. Thus "gay rights" laws would have no more substantial basis than alleged fantasy or inclination -- obviously impossible qualities to prove, and making "gay" status impossible to define or limit in numbers. No "microphone" exists capable of "amplifying" human thoughts; no camera exists able to capture mental visual sexual imagery. Thus, most narrowly defined, the entire concept of "gay rights" is utterly lacking in Constitutional merit or rational basis. We might as well award "sexual orientation" protection to religious fundamentalists who practice (or just say they wish to practice) sex in man-on-top-"missionary"-position only. Such people probably outnumber homosexuals in America. Or why not "gentlemen who prefer" buxom blonde women only? Again, "sexual orientation" as defined by gay militants to constitute alleged desire but not behavior affords an utterly insubstantial and unprovable basis on which to build an entire new edifice of special status protections. Until and unless it becomes possible to monitor thoughts and/or sexually-related mental imagery, "sexual orientation" can only be alleged -- and special status laws protecting "sexual orientation" so defined cannot be rationally established or enforced.

Consider the following operative definitions of "sexual orientation" recently offered by "gay rights" supporters in the "constitutionality" trial of Colorado's Amendment 2:


".a physical attraction to and desire to share sexual intimacy with partners of a particular gender.
.an emotional attraction to and desire to share emotional intimacy with partners of a particular gender
.personally identifying oneself as a heterosexual, lesbian, bisexual, or gay
.establishing a public identity based on your sexual orientation
.identifying with a community defined by its sexual orientation"
(Source: Civil Rights, Democracy, & Amendment 2, pamphlet produced by GLAAD/Denver, in consultation with the American Civil Liberties Union and others, cop. 1993, page F)
These "definitions," satisfaction of one OR more of which may qualify a person for a particular "sexual orientation," rest entirely on personal allegation, admit no investigation or proof, and afford grounds so vague that the author of this paper may irrefutably claim active "gay sexual orientation" based on four out of five, without claiming to have had a single homosexual experience or fantasy! Gay militants are asking that gays be recognized as a protected class based on nothing but their unexamined word -- a development totally unprecedented in civil rights history.
In an era when only 16% of African American women and 12% of African American men hold professional or managerial jobs (vs. 49% of gays), and black-owned businesses annual grosses average less than $50,000 per year (vs. $50,000+ average yearly earnings for individuals comprising gay households -- see The Denver Post, "L.A. riots renew focus on minority firms' plight," May 17, 1992, p. 3-H), to allow gay advantages legislation to bestow resources on a new "protected class" that is in no way disadvantaged, is in truth a special interest and cannot be established or limited on any rational basis would be simply unconscionable. Furthermore, a curious paradox ensues if "sexual orientation," always defined in "gay rights" laws as including homosexuality, bisexuality and heterosexuality, is granted protected class status: Suddenly, even if "sexual orientation" could be proved, more than 90% of the adult population would become equivalent under law to a disadvantaged "minority" class -- regardless of income, education, behavior, political clout, or even ability to prove their "orientation." Come again? 90% of nothing definable becomes a "minority?"

Clearly, grant protected class status and special privileges solely on the basis of how a few people representing a concerted special interest choose to have (or merely say they desire to have) "divergent" sex, and the whole concept of special civil rights protections and their enforcement will become hopelessly compromised, meaningless -- in fact, destroyed.

If "gayness," defined only by unchallengeable alleged fantasy is allowed to establish itself as a protected class for civil rights purposes (a precedent not even allowed for religious profession, which must be verified for civil rights purposes by clear demonstration that religious profession is consistent with religious behavior), the privilege extended to gays will be required to apply to any group claiming benefits and status under civil rights law.

No one's claim by mere allegation will be deniable (or even investigatable) by civil rights authorities. Someone of Scandinavian descent might well secure a legal name change so as to establish a Hispanic identity, in order to gain access to minority civil rights entitlements. If gay militants have their way, the very ability of civil rights authorities to investigate the legitimacy of claims will be destroyed. Thus, the entire fabric of civil rights protections will collapse -- at untold cost to true minorities.

Since civil rights law pertaining to suspect or protected class status was first enacted, it has involved, as it were, temporary abridgements of fundamental Constitutional rights, such as that of free association, to ensure that classes of people who have been demonstrably persecuted or oppressed by society, leaving them disadvantaged and politically powerless, based on non-behavioral characteristics over which they have no control are not excluded from full participation in society.

Presumably, when these protected classes have been "made whole," to use civil rights terminology, and these classes achieve parity of opportunity and status relative to society at large, these special protections will no longer be needed. Gays as an entire class cannot prove a need for suspect or protected class status. To arbitrarily introduce into suspect status groups far more advantaged than America's people-at-large would surely defeat the purpose and intent of civil rights laws as they have always been conceived and enforced, and injure the interests of legitimately qualifying protected classes.

Right....If you are black..then you cannot wake up one day and declare that you have been repressing white feelings and now you will be coming out of the closet and proclaiming that you are white and proud.

Same argument being made here..and i am thankful that logic and understanding will finally be used in lawmaking. I will use this same argument to push for legislation in my state to preemptively strip GLBT any rights in my state.

__________________
"People have so manipulated the concept of freedom, that it finally boils down to the right of the stronger and richer to take from the weaker and poorer whatever they have left."

Politics based on sexual perversions ARE NOT politics at all. It is an act of banditry, and a subversive act to alter constitutional law for someone's personal agenda. The Gays are nothing more than a pressure group....they have no standing whatever under the constitution, nor in anyone's law court, nor in anyone's country. They are merely a collection of sodomists trying to form a powerbase to exploit. They are criminal....they are unconstitutional, and they are a threat to everyone.

You and whoever wrote that laughable cut and paste should do yourselves a favor, and look up the suspect class provision of the 14th amendment, and then look up the SCOTUS and federal court rulings on gay issues that are related.

Newsflash sport, Gays are already a protected class under the 14th amendment.

By the way, the smell of self loathing in your words is as pungent as a skunks tale. Freud would love you as a case study

Come on out of the closet, you will find it liberating.

__________________
A brilliant mind and a superior intellect, no matter WHAT screen name I am logged in under

Some people say all Republicans are inbred ignorant southern hicks,,,,NOT TRUE…Some live in Indiana

It's quite simple really, I'm smarter then you

Really?...and just where may that be found?

14th. Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,(See Note 15) and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.


Wow...no mention of GLBT in that?.........

__________________
"People have so manipulated the concept of freedom, that it finally boils down to the right of the stronger and richer to take from the weaker and poorer whatever they have left."

The Court struck down a Texas statute prohibiting homosexual sodomy on substantive due process grounds. In Justice O'Connor's opinion concurring in the judgment, however, she argued that by prohibiting only homosexual sodomy, and not heterosexual sodomy as well, Texas's statute did not meet rational-basis review under the Equal Protection Clause; her opinion prominently cited City of Cleburne.


Notably, O'Connor did not claim to apply a higher level of scrutiny than mere rational basis, and the Court has not extended suspect-class status to sexual orientation.

Nice try.........

__________________
"People have so manipulated the concept of freedom, that it finally boils down to the right of the stronger and richer to take from the weaker and poorer whatever they have left."

gay people are protected by article one of the 14th amendment.

and most states have repealed all sodomy laws- for gays and straights.

I'm curious to know what your field of work is?
or your educational background?

All Americans are covered under sec.1...the Court has not extended suspect-class status to sexual orientation.

__________________
"People have so manipulated the concept of freedom, that it finally boils down to the right of the stronger and richer to take from the weaker and poorer whatever they have left."

Classic...bwhahahahahaha !!!!!!
(Where DO they find thse idiots)

Get a literate friend to help you read up on equal protection and suspect classes

Equal protection - Wex

__________________
A brilliant mind and a superior intellect, no matter WHAT screen name I am logged in under

Some people say all Republicans are inbred ignorant southern hicks,,,,NOT TRUE…Some live in Indiana

It's quite simple really, I'm smarter then you

YES, WE LAOTHE THE GAYS....WHO NEEDS SODOMISTS! WHAT GOOD ARE YOU TO ANYONE? The constitution says PEOPLE it does not say FAGGOTS! You queer bastards are trying to alter things in this country to accomodate the pervert and attack polite society. We regard you as those who suffer from sexual deviance disorder, filthy, nasty, disturbed, disease ridden faggots who flaunt their faggotry in an effort to create a subversive powerbase to exploit. Demorats went right up your asses to your brains. Communised Faggots were created when the demorat spilled his seed into your nasty bowels.

You are those who spit upon flags.....spit upon soldiers....molest children....hate America.....hate family structure because you were rejected by your own family for your failure to exercise self control and decency. Instead you have attacked society, and you deman society conform to your wishes! Well you are finding that society fights back. To the bottom of the ocean with any faggot bastard who attempts to change the very foundation of this country and all it stood for.

Go away....America does not need you. Go away.....you turned your back on America long ago. Go away....you have brought us disease, discord, and filth. Go away....politics based on sodomy is no politics at all.....only a filthy nasty game to attempt to wrest control of government from the law abiding and patriotic citizens. Go away....you are nothing but a grief factory to us. No matter what concessions we made to appease you, it was never enough....you are bastards and scum all of you. Go away and leave our schools alone. Go away and leave our children alone. Go away and leave society alone.