Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Thursday May 22, 2008
Who shall prevail—the judges or the people?
The California Supreme Court has ruled (by a 4-3 vote) in its supposedly “infinite” wisdom that the California state constitution requires that same-sex couples must have the same right to get married as heterosexual couples do. The California Supreme Court did this in spite of the fact that the people of California voted in a referendum in 2000 that marriage was only to be a man and a woman, thus ruling out not only same-sex marriage, but also polygamy.
Californians voted by a 61 to 39 percent margin to define marriage in this exclusive and specific way. When one examined the referendum votes more closely, marriage “as only between a man and a woman” carried every county in the state, including San Francisco. It also carried virtually every age and ethnic demographic with the single exception of voters between 18 and 25 years of age.
The California justices brushed the wishes of the state’s electorate aside with seemingly little, if any, discomfort. Fortunately, it appears that there will be a constitutional amendment on the ballot this November. This amendment initiative would allow the people of California to give their Supreme Court further instructions on how they would have themselves to be governed in the matter of what constitutes marriage.
If they amend their constitution to define marriage as only between a man and a woman, they will have struck a blow for democratic government. They also will have won a victory for government “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” instead of imperial rule by judges who seem to have little, if any, compunction about overriding the clear wishes of the people if the people dare to disagree with the judges’ “enlightened” social values.
Filed Under: casting stones, Richard Land
posted by Dr. Richard Land @ 5:54pm Permalink 
Email This 
Add to:
Subscribe
RSS Feed
About Casting Stones
Diana Butler Bass is a religion scholar and author of Christianity for the Rest of Us: How the Neighborhood Church is Transforming the Faith. She blogs at God’s Politics.
Tony Campolo is Professor Emeritus at Eastern University and author of The God of Intimacy and Action: Reconnecting Ancient Spiritual Practices, Evangelism, and Justice, with Mary Darling. He blogs at God’s Politics.
Rod Dreher is a columnist for The Dallas Morning News and author of Crunchy Cons: The New Conservative Counterculture and Its Return to Roots. He blogs at Crunchy Con.
Bruce Feiler is the author of seven books, including Walking the Bible: A Journey by Land Through the Five Books of Moses. He blogs at Feiler Faster.
Dan Gilgoff is Politics Editor at Beliefnet and author of The Jesus Machine: How James Dobson, Focus on the Family, and Evangelical America are Winning the Culture War. He blogs at God-o-Meter.
David Kuo served as a special assistant to President George W. Bush and is the author of Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction. He blogs at J-Walking.
Dr. Richard Land is president of The Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission and author of The Divided States of America? What Liberals AND Conservatives are missing in the God-and-country shouting match!
Michele McGinty is a mom and a student at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. She blogs at Reformed Chicks Blabbing.
Brian McLaren is a pastor, musician, and author of Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope. He blogs at God’s Politics.
Steven Waldman is co-founder, CEO, and Editor-in-Chief of Beliefnet. His book Founding Faith will be published in March, and he can be reached through the Beliefnet community.
Jim Wallis is executive director of Sojourners/Call to Renewal and author of God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It. He blogs at God’s Politics.
Comments
A majority of voters supported George Wallace for governor of Alabama and his slogan of 'segregation forever'. Did that make segregation a morally defensible position?
A majority of Germans supported Hitler's treatment of Jews in the '30s. Does majority vote make right?
There are, worldwide, more Muslims than Christians. Does numerical majority mean that one faith group has the right to impose their will on another?
The Taliban imposed their will on the nation of Afghanistan, backed by a majority of citizens. Do you consider the fight to save minority rights there to be illegitimate?
"Rights" applies to ALL citizens, however much that may run counter to the dominionist agenda.
Posted by: eric | May 24, 2008 5:48 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?