You haven’t even finished reading this and you’re already banging out a moronic response to this article. Read all the way through and then write in and with an informed opinion.
One of the initiatives on the California state ballot in 2000 was Proposition 22, a law that defined for the state of California that a legal marriage was between one man and one woman. That law passed with a handsome majority of the vote. In that election 4,618,673 Californians voted in favor of Proposition 22 and 2,909,370 voted against it with 353,956 casting neither a yes or no vote. The percentages were 61.40% in favor, 38.60% opposed and 4.49% abstaining. That was supposed to be the end of the story. The people had spoken and the majority ruled. Honest and commendable efforts were made on the part of those opposing Proposition 22 but the basis of the American political system is that the majority rules in America – the will of the people.
But the will of the people doesn’t count when it comes to the state of California.
The ink had hardly dried on the forms certifying the results of the 2000 election when lawsuits started popping up all over the place – especially in the San Francisco area demanding the courts overturn Proposition 22. In San Francisco, a trial court was the first to commute the will of the people and invalidate the gender requirements. A California state appellate court reversed that decision supporting the will of the people. In December 2006, the California state Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments in the six cases filed against Proposition 22 and consolidated them into one case. A year and a half later, on May 15, 2008, the California state Supreme Court made its final ruling on the case and in a 4-3 decision usurped the power of the people and overthrew the Proposition as if to hog-tie the people of the state and forcibly shove gay marriage down the throats of the people. As San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsome said, “The door is wide open now, whether you like it or not!”
Marriage defense organizers shifted into high gear to get another initiative on the ballot, Proposition 8 which is a Constitutional amendment that overrides the state Supreme Court and reinstates Proposition 22 – this time without any recourse for those opposing it.
Now you know this history, now for the meat of the argument.
Proposition 8 is more than just a marriage defense amendment, it is a direct and legitimate response to the ridiculous litigiousness of America. Every day millions of thumb-sucking crybabies like those who opposed Proposition 22 run crying to their lawyers when they don’t get their way. The end result is that the courts are bogged down in stupid lawsuits and even stupider judges legislate from their bench. In the case of the California state Supreme Court the will of four judges is imposed on the almost 34 million people who live in the state. Ridiculous? That marker was passed a long time ago.
Regardless of how many people voted in that election in 2000, the basic, fundamental premise of America is majority rule. Even when electing a president, the majority rules. Does this mean the majority is always right? No. After all there are some pretty stupid laws on the books across America that are the result of majority rule. But the process is there because the Founding Fathers knew that if the power of the government were in the hands of the government it could and would lead to authoritarianism or worse. It placed the power in the hands of the people to cast a vote and decide for themselves. The national Constitution does not give the U.S. Supreme Court the right to just overthrow the will of the people on a whim and since most state constitutions are similar in nature to the national one, it can be safely said that the California state constitution does not grant that right to the state Supreme Court either.
That Proposition 8 is even on the ballot is the direct result of plain stupidity and sophomoric idiot judges who seem to think that it is their job to do what they want and say to hell with what the people want. These are the beginnings of authoritarianism where those who govern take no direction from nor are they responsible to those who are governed . It is not the business of the government of the United States or any of the several states to impose the will of a few on the many without the consent of the many. If the people of California do not want to recognize gay marriage, that is their right and no group or organization has the right to force that issue through the court system. If a law is unfair, then the group opposing that law has the right to appeal back to the people, to make their case and to live with the results. If the results are not fair or are discriminatory in some way, then the law needs to be changed. But for a court to just whimsically decide what is best for the people is wrong. The sole purpose for supporting Proposition 8 isn’t to deny legal rights to gays who live together – they already have those rights under California law. Supporting Proposition 8 is a means of telling the state Supreme Court to back off when the people have spoken. Never mind the legal protections for the rest of California that come with Proposition 8 – all of which is another story for another time.