|
But you get into the icky territory, where a single states decision overrides the will of other states.
Does Georgia have to recognise a union made in Mass. when it's laws forbid such a union.
Nations have schismed over less fellas. This is quite a significant issue. Henry VIII caused a HUGE HUGE storm in Europe by deciding to change his nations church structure so he could remarry.
The issue is, by what right does a judge in ONE STATE override the will of the people, enacted in accordance with the democratic legal principles the nation is founded on.
"Tyyrany of the people" is hardly the case. No-one is forcing a gay couple to seperate, not sleep together, or not live together all their lives, or even declare undying lifelong love for each other.
The "Tyrrany of the people" is simply voicing the values they wish to encourage and endorse.
And this is a clear majority of Americans. Even California has a majority 50 - 44 deciding that male-female life unions should be elevated as per socially recognised marriage.
If we are all bisexual and we all choose our sexuality, any individual can become married in this fashion if they wish, either out of convenience or love, or desire to procreate.
If a majority of Californians, and a majority of Americans have decided on an issue, by what mandate, by what right under a representative democracy, does a mayor or judge thumb their nose at this?
Who is deciding tyrrany here? I would call a tyrrany one where an individual decides that "the people don't know what is best" and enforces THEIR law over the people.
In a democracy, if you believe the populace are wrong CONVINCE THEM of their error, as per the democratic process. Don't override their democratic rights.
[ 02-27-2004, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]
|