Vent Out Loud

The passing of Proposition 8 in the California general election on November 4, 2008, is not new news.  For those uninformed readers, Proposition 8 changed the state’s constitution and eliminated the right for same sex couple to get married.  While this topic is very controversial, the purpose of this article is not to debate the issue.  To each his/her own. 

The real issue and current event is that the passing of the proposition was appealed to California’s top court for a final decision.  That decision was announced yesterday and for those of you who keep up on current events, you already know the outcome.  For those of you that do not, we will keep you in suspense for just a little bit longer (don’t cheat and skip ahead).  Consider that punishment for not watching the news, picking up a newspaper or reading anything meaningful online.   

I will preface my next statement with an open invitation to correct me if I am wrong.  Let’s think about the process by which the California state constitution can be changed.  Please be warned, I am not a lawyer, senator, state representative or anyone in any public office.  In fact, I barely got by Political Science in college.  I may have failed it once and had to retake it.  It’s been so long.  I apologize for getting off track.  My best understanding is that the whole process is quite simple. 

Step 1: Propose an amendment to the constitution.

Step 2: Hold an election for the masses.

Step 3: If the people vote in favor, the amendment passes.  If not, it does not. 

That seems pretty straightforward to me.  I should have applied myself more in college.  California’s process appears to be democracy at work.  “Government of the people, by the people and for the people…”  So, why the appeal?  Because that is the right of the people and the way the justice system is set up.  You don’t like the outcome?  Take it to the next level.  Now for the outcome.  As reported yesterday by Reuters and mentioned earlier, the decision was appealed to the top court for a final “yay or nay”.  Way to go, California.  According to the article by Reuters, the court ruled that, to overturn the decision reached in the election would be to overturn the decision of the people.  In doing so, they would set a precedent that the court (which is arguably the least democratic branch of government) had more power than the people as a whole.  This would be a clear abuse of power. 

For the record, I don’t agree with Proposition 8.  People should be free to marry who they wish.  On the other hand, don’t expect the court system to overturn what 52% of the state (voters) elected.  You aren’t happy with decision?  Leave or fight harder next time.  It may give me something to vent about but tying up precious court time with an issue such as this is a waste of tax dollars.