Dude. There doesn't have to be. >.> you don't understand. Why are they any different? The answer is they're not. Their's no amendment for 5"8' people with blond hair either.
We have amendments for colored people and women by colored I mean blacks Asians and Latin americans it was a blanket amendment for those races
Let me change my statement then. It applies to all US citizens. Slaves and black people weren't counted as citizens. (you'll recall the 3/5 compromise by Henry Clay), it applies to everybody, unless it says otherwise, (women) or they're not citizens, (other races)
Yes I understand that but colored people and women are people yet they did not have rights til their respective amendments when you are dealing in the legal field which rights are there is no gray area it has to be in the black and white otherwise it does not exist
What is required is an amendment stating homosexuals have rights until then we will be in bs that we were in presufferage and precivil rigyts
It doesn't say they don't get rights, so they do. There needs to be an amendment saying they don't get rights, before an amendment saying they have them is needed for them to have rights.
I am both gay (bisexual) and an atheist but I can understand why people would believe it's immoral because it goes against their beliefs. But I believe everyone has the right and freedom to love