When the Judge Becomes a Tyrant.
California has taken yet another step towards socailistic bliss denial. Being one of the more influential states in the USA (lets face it, Hollywood and San Francisco kind of have a hold of culture by the crotch), I guess it was only a matter of time before something like this happened… but that doesn’t make it any less disturbing. On the one hand, the judges have interpretation of the law and mediation between groups of people at the center of their job description… on the other, they also don’t have any responsibility to be accountable to anyone.
There are a couple of things I want to point out with this story. First is the fact that the decision was made 4-3. Secondly, this decision overturned a voter approved ban on same-sex marriage. Third is the way the journalist paints the picture of the religious protesters that are trying to get a constitutional ammendment placed on the ballot in November.
In complete disregard for the will of the voters (the law that was overturned was approved by 61% of the electorate in 2000… a percentage more than enough to end a philibuster in the senate) the California supreme court struck down both Proposition 22 (the 2000 law) and the original definition of marriage passed in 1978. You want to talk about not respecting democratic process? The (unelected) Supreme Court just made legislation for the state of California based on a 4-3 decision! This is the kind of “leadership” that military juntas and the “politburo”s of the world are built on.
I am firmly convinced that this fight is more about people attempting to stick their thumb in God’s eye and not about their rights. Why? Because California already gave equal priveledges and rights to gay couples in “domestic partnerships” that they did to people in marriages (including divorce, adoption, all of it), the only difference being that there wasn’t any kind of covenant to be together until death made before God. If you already have all the rights and priveledges, why on earth would you still need to get the state to recognize it as a “marriage”? At that point, it is either a pointless fight (no pun intended) or it is just trying to prove to those religious nut jobs that you are more powerful than their cutesy little traditions or morality. Either way, I’m nervous about the nefarious direction the multifarious judiciaries are heading.