Religious Right Hate Group Says Majority Vote Overrules US Constituion

[Hissyspit]

From Americablog:
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/05/religious-right-hate-group-says.html

Religious right hate group says majority vote of citizens overrules the US Constitution
by John in DC - 5/18/2005 11:09:00 PM

How messed up is that. Why do these people even want to live in this country since they clearly hate our system of government?

From the Family Research Council:

"This is a blatant display of judicial arrogance where a non-elected federal judge has shown a total disregard for what 70% of Nebraska voters stated, marriage is between one man and one woman," said Tony Perkins, President of Family Research Council.

"This unfortunate act of judicial activism makes it very clear that marriage is at risk in the federal courts and Congress must pass, and the people of this country must ratify, an amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage as being between one man and one woman."

Uh, actually Anthony, you kind of screwed up on this one. Not only is our system of government NOT built on the premise that a majority vote overrules the Constitution, but using your logic, even WITH a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage all we need is a majority vote of the citizenry to ignore it - since, after all, you and the FRC clearly believe that the majority vote of citizens overrules the Constitution and judges have no right to intervene in order to say that the majority vote is unconstitutional.

[iceman_419]

1. Just goes with the stereotype of Religious conservatives

They are ingorant. We are not a direct democracy, and the government didn't even have to let the people vote on this issue. If 70% of the people voted to bring back slavery, would that be constitutional. They think that majority rule is final and that there should be no questions. Gays are the new Black people. As for the judge, he did everything exactly right. He had to strike down the whole law, or else he would be making a new law and that would be unconstitutional. What sickens me is that the people of this anti-intellectual state think that gay marriage is more imporant that healthcare, medicare, crime, sex crimes (I'm looking at you catholic church), and such. Face it people of religion are hypocrits and want everything their own way. Now they want us to live under their rules. Not only are we letting religious zealots win, we are allowing ignorance to win.

[Tux]

3. Fight it

I use the word "spiritual" instead of religious. Why? Spiritual seems more modern, adaptive, and connected to the Divine while religious seems too dogmatic. We can't let ignorance rule America but it can be fought. One way is to make tracts about spirituality vs religion and leave them in books at a Christian bookstore. It's rude but a nice media virus could get started.

[LittleClarkie]

2. Hmm, one side is going for the "Constitutional option"

while the other tries to amend it. Curiouser and curiouser.

[no_hypocrisy]

4. Religious fundamentalists should read "The Federalist Papers" with

their Bible to learn that this country is designed as a CONSTITUTIONAL republic, not a majoritarian democracy. Rules are made by fundamental principles that are consistently employed with theme and variation to the issue at hand, not by counting the number of hands in the air. That's why court exist. And this country is organized to protect the minority from the whims and abuses of the majority, whether it's a group based on economic power, religious power, whatever. Anything else is just plain unconstitutional and fascist.