Mulling over the win in Washington state and the defeat in Maine continues. Is it time to give up on trying to get our rights through referendums? Is putting gay marriage up for a vote even constitutional? Rights shouldn't be up for a vote -- it's called tyranny of the majority. Why are we accepting mob rule?
While the constitutionality of these votes is the question of the day, one observer notes that if the Supremes ruled against us it would be unfortunate (I prefer the word disastrous) but it would not be tyrannical nor unconstitutional because the decision was reached in the manner prescribed by our constitution.
One wonders if we should push for Domestic Partnerships, which succeeded in Washington, to give gay couples needed protections until society catches up.
The first commenter disagrees. Why subject ourselves to mob rule? Because we have no other choice. While court cases are doing their thing a state-by-state campaign is all we have. Let the Fundies rule the airwaves without a rebuttal? Nope.
If you look at just the 31-0 track record for gay marriage votes you might get discouraged. But that tally doesn't count the number of states where a marriage amendment was defeated before it got to the voters. And there are 5 states that do have gay marriage. Even though there are two states where marriage was snatched away all the work on getting the legislatures on our side is not wasted effort.
The game may be rigged but for now it's the game we have to play.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment