Author Topic: Fed judge strikes down state legislation  (Read 509 times)

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24454
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Fed judge strikes down state legislation
« on: August 04, 2010, 04:06:35 PM »
Just heard it on the news... a Federal judge has just struck down California's sex sex marriage ban.  
w

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66422
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Fed judge strikes down state legislation
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2010, 04:32:42 PM »
Newt Gingrich: Gay Marriage Ruling 'Outrageous'
Wednesday, 04 Aug 2010

In a statement released on his website late Wednesday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich blasted a federal judge's decision overturning California's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage.

"Judge Walker's ruling overturning Prop 8 is an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife. In every state of the union from California to Maine to Georgia, where the people have had a chance to vote they've affirmed that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Congress now has the responsibility to act immediately to reaffirm marriage as a union of one man and one woman as our national policy.

"Today’s notorious decision also underscores the importance of the Senate vote tomorrow on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court because judges who oppose the American people are a growing threat to our society.”

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/gingrich-gay-marriage-california-proposition8/2010/08/04/id/366637

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15439
Re: Fed judge strikes down state legislation
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2010, 04:41:14 PM »
« Voting in the Mainstream PressAn Epiphany: We Technologists Don’t Always Get It »The Majority is Not Always Right
Filed under: General — November 19, 2003 @ 2:23 pm

It’s easy to forget that, in a democratic process, most decisions are not made by the majority. The people choose representatives, and the representatives make decisions. Furthermore, the courts can overrule the simple majority of representatives if a decision conflicts with prior principle (say, the Constitution).

The majority simply can’t be trusted to make the right decisions all the time.

This week, Massachusetts judges struck down a ban on gay marriage. Conservative circles are screaming that the judges failed to respect the will of the people, because the majority of US citizens polled oppose gay marriage. The best response comes from Elizabeth Birch, director of Human Rights Campaign:

“If not for courts, African-Americans would not have had the right to vote, women would not have the right to vote. The purpose of a constitution is to protect a minority group from the wrath of the majority.”
(taken from a CNN article)

There are more examples of this. The French government abolished the death penalty when 65% of the population still supported it. Today, more than 20 years later, less than 40% of French citizens support a return to the death penalty.

A government that follows the majority opinion at all times is a government that trails public trends. We elect government officials not so they can take the public’s temperature every hour and spit out a statistically correct average. We elect government officials who have a certain vision of the future and a reasonable way of getting there. We trust them to work hard at this vision, to tell us how they’re progressing, and, if they fail, we punish them by not reelecting them.

The majority makes decisions of high-level principle. Once those principles are in place, a complex system of checks and balances gears up to implement them while preventing the majority from screwing it up. It’s a bit counter-intuitive, but it’s a damn good system.


Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Fed judge strikes down state legislation
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2010, 04:52:27 PM »
Quote
“If not for courts, African-Americans would not have had the right to vote, women would not have the right to vote. The purpose of a constitution is to protect a minority group from the wrath of the majority.”

The purpose of the constitution is to protect minorities? The purpose of the constitution is and has always been to protect the people from the government.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66422
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Fed judge strikes down state legislation
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2010, 04:56:26 PM »
If you think about it, the majority does control what happens in this country, because the Constitution can be amended through votes. 

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24454
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Fed judge strikes down state legislation
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2010, 05:36:14 PM »
The purpose of the constitution is to protect minorities? The purpose of the constitution is and has always been to protect the people from the government.

And it looks like a Massachusetts judge, just acted to protect Gays & Lesbians in California from the California government. Quite sad that it has even had to come down to that.
w