« Renewable Energy | Main | Fate Of The Final Four »
Gay Marriage: The Nullification of Democracy
May 18, 2008 | Permalink
Comments
Just goes to prove what I've said all along. A vote for a Liberal (Democrat) is a vote for the end of America. They've destroyed marriage; destroyed religion; destroyed national pride; destroyed education; destroyed the family and are trying to destroy the Military. They want us to be ashamed of being successful. They think "Democracy" is letting those who work hard and save support those who refuse to do so. It's hard to respect a fool who wildly supports infanticide under the guise of "freedom of choice", while vehemently opposing the death penalty for mass murderers convicted by a jury of their peers! "Gay" anything, is an abomination and was why God destoyed Sodom and Gomorrah! They must have had Democrat governments.
Posted by: Jerry | May 18, 2008 7:33:49 PM
in the right time, abolition of slavery was also unpopular. nullification of democracy in the strictest sense, perhaps, but an upholding of equal rights and justice. hear hear, CA supreme court!
Posted by: joe | May 18, 2008 7:34:23 PM
in the right time, abolition of slavery was also unpopular. nullification of democracy in the strictest sense, perhaps, but an upholding of equal rights and justice. hear hear, CA supreme court!
Posted by: joe | May 18, 2008 7:35:39 PM
This is the absolutely best summary of what happened.
Thanks,
David
Posted by: LifeTrek | May 19, 2008 5:15:06 AM
Basic rights aren't up for a vote. The relevant basic right, in this case, is Equal Protection. That is, the law must treat everyone the same.
If that application of that is up for a vote, then none of our rights mean anything -- unless, of course, you're in the majority. If you could vote, for example, on whether something is protected by the First Amendment, then you have no Free Speech. Freedom of Religion would vanish, except within bounds acceptable to the majority. (Sorry Jews! You're Presbyterian now!) I don't see a lot of Second Amendment supporters inclined to accept majority rule on gun ownership.
The California Court went to great pains to say that it was not in any way ruling on the morality of gay marriage, but that the California Constitution requires that all people be treated the same under the law.
The Founders referred to the "Tyranny of the Majority" saying the democracy is not, by itself, liberty. There must be protections of the minority.
The inability of self-described Constitutional Constructionists -- you know, the people who bitch about the activist judiciary -- to understand that basic concept of American governance boggles my mind. It seems not the least bit complicated, but for some reason conservatives seem to think that basic human freedoms should be subject to a majority vote. That shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the basic underpinnings of this country.
And then there's this: just exactly what business is it of yours who marries who? If you don't like gay people, you're free to not associate with them. What is it that makes you think you have any standing at all in dictating other people's relationships -- at least, within the confines of a free society?
Posted by: Tom | May 19, 2008 11:33:50 AM
Tom, since you think the arguments for gay marriage are so persuasive, then why not put them to a real vote in the legislature? Hmmm?
Posted by: Tom McMahon | May 19, 2008 10:05:07 PM
First of all, you've sidestepped my entire point, which is that basic rights, if they're going to mean anything, aren't up to a vote.
Secondly, the California legislature twice passed civil union laws.
Posted by: Tom | May 20, 2008 7:28:07 AM
What gave the CA Supremes the right to redefine a word?
Marriage is defined as between a man and a woman.
I have no objection to same sex "unions", other than their use of words. Have them choose some other word.
Posted by: Bob in SeaTac | May 20, 2008 8:00:23 PM
