Proposition 8 and the will of the people

When the California Supreme Court created a “right” for homosexual couples to marry, the people of California did what they are supposed to be able to do: they changed the California constitution by popular vote with Proposition 8 to renew the definition of marriage that has been a foundation, a cornerstone of civilization for millennia. The initial firestorm over Proposition 8 has calmed down, we no longer have protestors interrupting church services and vandalizing mormon church property in California.

That should have ended the issue. But we live in a day of Roe v. Wade, where the courts see fit to not only sit in judgment on the constitutionality of laws but to create new laws and rights where none exist. This has led to a shattering of the “checks and balances” kids used to learn about in school which prevents one branch of government from becoming too powerful. It worked great for a long time, until we reached a case that stretched the bounds of logic and legal scholarship to the breaking point: Roe v. Wade, where the Supreme Court of the United States created a “right” for women to have an abortion by the most tortured of logic. Since then, the courts in America have felt free and indeed emboldened to make laws from the bench. No longer seeing themselves as judges, they now see themselves as benevolent rulers who gently correct the misdeeds of the ignorant masses in this country. So this week we will see a spectacle that would be hilarious if it were not so ominous, the potential of the California Supreme Court invalidating a Constitutional amendment.

Even the justification for this challenge is specious. Former Governor Moonbeam, now Attorney General Jerry Brown is refusing to carry out his duties as an elected official and defend the state before the Supreme Court and is instead urging the court to overturn the decision of the people. The big argument is that the Constitutional amendment process of California should not be used to revoke an existing right, in this case being the right of homosexuals to solemnize their relationship under state marriage laws. Of course the elephant in the room is that the “right” for homosexuals to marry was created entirely by the California Supreme Court in the first place, and fairly recently at that.

It was never intended that the judiciary be in a position to create rights and laws where they do not exist. That is precisely what happened in Roe v. Wade several decades ago and in California more recently. If we want judges to rule over us, we should dismantle our system of republican democracy. Until we decide to do that, we need to reaffirm the system of Constitutional government at the state and Federal level, and the first shot in this war will be fired today in the chambers of the California Supreme Court. The ramifications of the Supreme Court decision in California will have immense impact on not just California, but the entire nation. Not just because homosexuals will get “married” in California and then expect to have those marriages recognized in other states, but because the precedent could be set that the Courts have the right to invalidate amendments to Constitutions that they dislike.

Pay attention people.