U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby overturned a 66% majority vote on an amendment to clarify the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, stating that "The state’s current laws...demean the dignity of these same-sex couples for no rational reason."
"Why should I be upset about this?", you may say, "This is awesome! I'm totally excited about it" If this is you, my next point may not seem like a big deal, but I will explain: If we want laws to change, it needs to be because we vote on it, not because one person just decides we should. Suspend for a moment your opinion on this particular issue: are we okay with having one person decide to strike down the voice of the people just because he personally doesn't believe it's a good idea, or because he doesn't like the rationale of the other side? The judiciary is there to protect our rights, not to decide which laws are terrible. As Chief Justice Roberts said in last year's decision to uphold Obamacare, even though he personally disagreed with it, “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,”
Do we want a king or a democracy? In the Book of Mormon, a hefty number of people keep saying they want a king. Why would anyone want that? Well, think about it: if the king supports your views, he/she would sure get things done a lot faster and more efficiently than having to go through Congress. We could even still call them "president" or "judge" to make ourselves feel better. But even if you like the current outcomes of that system, you should not be okay with judicial fiat just because this one happens to support your view. The next one may not:
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
(from A Man For All Seasons)
"But Kindra", you may say,"the judiciary isn't legislating - they're just protecting the civil rights of a minority group, who are not being allowed to marry." Okay, let's be very clear about this - yes, their job is to strike down laws and amendments that violate the Bill of Rights, but this is not a Bill of Rights issue. Saying that lesbians and gay men are being denied their right to marry is actually a logical fallacy. Let me explain.
Every adult in America has the right to marry. Think about it. No one asks you your orientation at the courthouse. In the sense of how we are treated by the law, we are completely equal. You can be lesbian, black, atheist, whoever - you already have the right to get married. But all states decide what that contract looks like, and WHO you may marry. You're probably more okay with this than you realize. In most states, you are denied the right to marry more than one person, or marry a close relative, or marry a child, for example. Are you okay with these? Yes? No? Well, that's why the states vote on them: because marriage is a social contract with social functions and implications. Gender theory and conflict theory would have you interpret everything as though it's an issue of oppression, hate and bigotry - it's not. This is just a definition; It's a social contract, and it's flexible, and we can vote to change it. Please keep in mind - those of you who support gay marriage - you can and should still believe this!
"But they ARE being denied their rights", you will then say, probably indignantly. "They have the right to have their loving relationship legally validated just like anyone else." This is very important, please don't be mad at me - but you don't actually have that right, in any state. Getting married is an individual right, but defining marriage is not. Gay supporters - you can still be okay with this too!
What you're actually saying is, they SHOULD have the right. Aha! If you believe they should have the right to marry, and you think we should change the marriage laws, let's VOTE on it! Let's pass an amendment! This is a time for discussion and campaigning, not self-righteousness and accusations. We have to respect each other enough to do that.
While the justice system ensures that no one's civil rights are violated, the voice of the people decides on the nature and extent of every other type of right, and they are not nearly as clean-cut as we'd like to believe: does the doctor have the right to peace and quiet in his home, or does the drummer next door have the right to play? Do you have the right to walk around naked in public, or do I have the right to experience public decency? According to Hobbs, the mere fact that you live in a society of any kind requires you to give up certain rights. Fortunately, in this country and in this age, you have a say in what those are.
On a final note - while having your love validated is not a right defended by the Constitution (or at least, it is questionable), religion unquestionably IS. That means, whether you worship God or a giant flying squirrel or nothing, you have the right to believe, act, and vote according to your conscience. We are a country that is free for Orthodox Jews and white supremacist groups, gays and straights, progressives and conservatives. The beauty of America is that we don't eliminate any opinions from the table - EVERYONE is invited to come, to discuss, to debate, to persuade, and ultimately to vote. Just because someone believes something for religious reasons does not disqualify them from the conversation. Let's be a civil society - let us uphold American values in the way we treat one another, and let us uphold the system of governance that has been the ensign of freedom to the rest of the world for the last 250 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment