So...

[Occhidiangela]

The constitution, bill of rights, and US law are very clear about discrimination based on race, colour, age and sexual orientation

False statement. Congress has enacted a variety of legislation that forbids discrimination on the first three grounds, but not the last as far as I know, though there are many who advocate that extension of the principle. I will point out that the debates resulting in the Military being forbidden from witch hunting homosexuals, the "don't ask don't tell" compromise, did not change the basic military regulation, which is backed by Congressional acta as administrative law, that forbids open homoexual activity in the Armed Forces. For reference, please read the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It is available on a varitey of web sites. The article in question will in the 100's, I think, not far from the article forbiding the sexual abuse of animals by members of the Armed Forces. (Army mules are safefor the nonce -- or to put it another way, an ass may not be violated, by regulation, a fact that may not provide safety for a few horse's arses I know in uniform.) ;) Such legislation as you describe may in time come to pass, we shall see.

What one Constitutional Amendment does indeed state is that all citizens are to be afforded equal protection under the law. Go read the U. S. Constitution, OK, and please report back on which Amendment I am talking about. :D You will search far and wide in that document, without success, to find reference to sexual preference.

If the law passed by legislature says "no gay marriage" then it must apply equally to all, not just, for example, "no male gay marriage" or "no female gay marriage" of "no gay marriage to anyone with blonde hair." Whether or not that law is a valid exercise of a State's rights, and the will of the people in that State through their elected legislature, is about to be tested, it seems, in California at the very least.

Furthermore, it is not uncommon that some legislation contradicts, in a detail or two, other legislation passed by a Congress. Congress and-or the Courts then have to resolve the conflict.

For example, "separate but equal" statutes regarding education were found to be in conflict with other legislation, and were eventually overturned. At the least it ran at cross purposes with the Civil Rights act passed during the Eisenhower administration.

EDIT: Lousy proof reading and added the joke about horses' arses