Once again, gay rights groups are trying to circumvent democracy and the will of the majority of the people of California.
First, they did it by using the courts to overturn the votes of millions of Californians to keep marriage as it is traditionally defined, between a man and a woman.
Now, they are trying to use the courts to keep a constitutional amendment that would restore traditional marriage off the November ballot.
The proposed amendment, which easily gathered enough signatures to qualify for the ballot and was certified June 3, would be invalidated by being made to conform to a special process other than that outlined for normal amendments if Equality California and other civil rights organizations appealing to the state Supreme Court get their way again.
Their lawsuit says the amendment would change the state constitution so profoundly that it would qualify as a “revision” of the constitution, which would also require a two-thirds vote of the Legislature before it could be put on the ballot.
“Equality California and its allies are desperate to evade democracy. First, they used the courts to erase the votes of nearly 5 million Californians who voted to protect marriage. Now, they are trying to silence the people’s voice forever,” said Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) Senior Counsel Glen Lavy, according to The Bulletin. ADF is a Christian law group.
Whatever sympathy gay groups’ civil rights argument may have garnered is being stretched thin. The repeated attempts to thwart the will of the majority of Californians by employing the courts as a cudgel, to force through the agenda of a vocal minority, is not likely to win any friends and risks making enemies of people who had previously been on the fence.
Subscribe to the RSS feed
Question, Tad: Does democracy allow for the will of the majority to discriminate against the rights of a minority?
Comment by Ubiquitous Che — June 24, 2008 @ 5:27 pm
In a democracy its the will of the majority that is followed not the will of the minority
Comment by Bryant — June 27, 2008 @ 6:59 am
Thankyou, Bryant. Your ability to state the obvious is without peer.
However, is it the case that the will of the majority in America is such that it should be permissible to discriminate against the rights of a minority? You know – the will of America? The self-declared ‘Land of the Free’?
Hmm?
Comment by Ubiquitous Che — June 28, 2008 @ 5:21 pm
Discriminate? No. Is it the will of the minority that every time they have a gay pride parade we are forced to see gay men marching down the street in pink thongs? I think most of America would be more willing to accept if it weren’t for the outright atrocious and obnoxious displays. Is it the right of the minority to block the will of the majority? Is it the right of the minority to step outside of constitutional law to get what they want? No.
Comment by Bryant — June 29, 2008 @ 7:46 pm
That’s out of context, Bryant.
The context is whether or not homosexual men and women have the right to have their lifelong commitment to a partner recognized by the state with equal rights to heterosexual couples and without discrimination against them on grounds of their sexual orientation.
Secondly, even if they choose to have a gay pride parade, they are not forcing you to see anything. Men in pink thongs grosses me out too. The difference between you and me is that if I see something that grosses me out, I don’t look at it.
Comment by Ubiquitous Che — June 29, 2008 @ 8:31 pm
Clearly, homosexual fundamentalists hate democracy just like other types of fundamentalists.
Comment by Michael Ejercito — June 30, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
Does democracy allow for the will of the majority to discriminate against the rights of a minority?
Only if the discrimination is constitutional.
And constitutions can be amended to discriminate against a minority, like it or not.
Comment by Michael Ejercito — June 30, 2008 @ 9:09 pm
True.
So the question is this: Do the majority of Americans like to discriminate against minorities, or do they not?
Comment by Ubiquitous Che — July 2, 2008 @ 11:41 pm