Just As I Thought

Should the majority rule?

It always bothers me when politicos rail against “activist judges” or insist that any issues related to civil rights should be decided by the people. You can’t ever have equality that way.

“Obviously, these events are influencing my decision,” the president said. “I’m troubled by what I’ve seen. People need to be involved with this decision. Marriage ought to be defined by the people, not by the courts.”

First off, in a nation structured such as ours, the majority does not necessarily get it’s way. The equality of man means that the majority may not oppress the minority. Just because the majority of people would vote against same-sex marriage doesn’t mean that it should be outlawed.
Second, the president is so wedded (pun intended) to his carefully crafted rhetoric on this issue. I’m tired of his attempts to drive a wedge between the courts and the people by using such terms as “activist judges.” Those judges are applying the law. The activists are the lawmakers, who are now creating activist laws to deny equality and discriminate against an entire class of people in this country.
Third, the main argument by the anti-marriage groups is that God created marriage. If Bush claims that marriage is defined by the people, then he falls right into my argument — that marriage is hardly a “sacred” thing if it’s a man-made social construct.

Browse the Archive

Browse by Category