Over the next few days, I'll write some regarding Proposition 8 and why I think it is bad policy, bad law, basically unjust, and why I am voting "no" on 8. As a beginning, take a look at this old video about equality in marriage.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The Supreme Court here in Connecticut just pulled the same ridiculous stunt the court did in California - completely disregard the will of the people and legalize this abomination called same-sex "marriage."
My question to you is this, Roy (without getting into the theological debate):
If Prop 22 passed with such a majority, in 52 of 58 counties, are you saying that the clear will of the people of California is irrelevant? How can you call what the vast majority of people want "bad policy?"
michael, the vast majority of the people in the South felt that slavery was a good thing in the 1850's. Does that make slavery a good public policy?
Roy,
As of the 1860 census (the height of slavery in the US) about a third of Southern families were slave-owners. That's hardly a majority. On the other hand, Prop 22 passed with 61%, which is a clear majority.
Aristotle wrote that the "rule of law is better than the rule of the individual." In the California case (and now in Connecticut) the rule of law was overturned by four individuals. The democratic will of the people was vacated by four individuals without regard for the desires of their constituancies. Judges are supposed to be public servants, but in these cases served only the minorities. (And BTW, I would argue this point whether or not I agreed with the specifics of the case - just maybe not as vehemently.)
While perhaps 1/3 owned slaves, I'd bet the vast majority... perhaps over 90% believed that slavery was not only OK but was supported by the Bible.
Let's move a little closer to today and talk about marriage.
In my childhood many states prohibited marriage between blacks and whites. (I remember when the laws were overturned and I vaguely remember discussions in my extended family about interracial marriage.) It was certainly the majority rule in many southern states and even among many in the north. My blue collar family in Pittsburgh probably almost unanimously felt that marriage across racial lines was wrong and at least some of them felt it should be outlawed. Again, the law was based on popular opinion. It was wrong and while it may not have been seen as in violation of the constitution by the framers of the constitution, it certainly was in violation of the spirit of the constitution and of the trajectory of history.
In CA, the law was not "overturned" by 4 individuals. It did not meet the test of consistency with the constitution. They didn't write a law, the said the current interpretation didn't meet the standards set by the constitution. Judges may be public servants but they are bound to the law, not to public opinions.
Post a Comment