Whether or not you agree with the decision it can still be viewed as a positive step forward for the country. Let's suppose that you are a voter preparing to vote in an important election in your state. You do your research and make your decision and cast your vote. Months later the Supreme Court of your country overturns your decision. Pretty discouraging huh? Now let's suppose that it happens over and over and over. What would you start to think? I know that I would start to wonder if my vote was really worth it. I would ask myself what the point of voting for something is if every time I vote on it the court overturns my decision. It would definitely make me less likely to vote in the future. This is what was happening in California.
If you know the history of Prop. 8 you know that this is not the first time that Californians are voting on this. They had already made the decision once, but it was deemed unconstitutional. Doing the right thing Californians moved to alter the State Constitution, which they succeeded in doing. An overturn by the Supreme Court would be a kicking Californians while they are down. It would be telling them that their vote doesn't matter. The California Supreme Court sent an important message to California voters today: that their vote matters.
I have heard a lot of arguments from opponents of Prop. 8 stating that the citizens of the country should not be allowed to legislate. That they don't have all the facts and therefore cannot make a decision of such importance. They accuse voters of being ignorant and easily manipulated. Arguments of this sort show the true ignorance of the American people. The purpose of our representatives is not to make the decisions we are too stupid to make. They are to represent us. They are to take our beliefs, platforms, and issues and represent them in their respective jobs. We are a democratic republic. We send people to represent us purely to make things go a little smoother.
The second thing that gives me hope about the courts decision is the federalistic character behind it. In the tenth amendment to the Constitution the founders declared their intent to give all power not given by the Constitution to the federal government are given to the states. The power to determine who can marry who is definitely not in the U.S. Constitution. Where should the power to lie? With the states. It appears that this case will not be taken to the national level which means the federal government is finally giving respect to the states. Something we need to see more of.
I had a good discussion yesterday about the Constitutionality of a ban on same-sex marriage. While I am a firm believer that marriage is purely between a man and a woman, I cannot, from a U.S. Constitution point of view, see how such a decision could be reached by the Government. The best solution seems to be exactly what is happening. Let the states decide. And that's exactly what happened in California. California decided, and now their decision will be respected. God bless the U.S.A.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Just to stir things up... you know that the Church officially supports a federal gay marriage ban, right (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,635210773,00.html)? You better be careful at BYU- you're going against your leaders ;)
ReplyDeleteAlso, does 'Other Worthy Sources' (on the right side of your page) mean that the contributors have successfully passed an interview with their bishop?
Yeah I know they support it, and I would too, if they asked. :) The only way it could happen though would be an amendment to the Constitution. We'll see what happens.
ReplyDeleteThe "other worthy sources" haven't passed their interviews yet, but I'm working with them to get their affairs in order.