🚀 go-pugleaf

>In article <mj3XxQ9ytxPH089yn@csn.net>, Thad Smith <ThadSmith@acm.org> wrote:
>>Let's put this in perspective.  Amendment 2 prohibits passage of laws
>>which establishes sexual preference as a protected class with regard
>>to discrimination for employment, and probably other social
>>interactions such as housing (I can't remember the details now).  That
>>means simply that cities, such as Boulder, cannot give special
>>consideration to sexual orientation in terms of enforcement.

Is being a member of a protected class a constitutional right?

Should constitutional rights be contingent on race, gender, sexual
orientation, etc.?

I ask this because I am denied membership in any protected class
because of my race, gender, and so forth.  (I am male, caucasian,
and hetero.)

SO:  Either being a member of a protected class is NOT a constitutional
     right, or I am being denied a constitutional right because of my
     race, gender and sexual orientation.

Which is it, folks?

Paul Ciszek              "Literacy will not be a priority where our children
                          are concerned."  --Yusef Dakari, advocating the
pciszek@nyx.net                              creation of Afro-centric schools