Gay marriage vote unfair?
Muhlenberg Weekly Executive Board
Issue date: 11/12/09 Section: Op/Ed
Last Tuesday, the citizens of Maine voted on the same-sex marriage law, which was repealed. A gay rights activist said, "Maine was not ready to let gay people have the protection of the law, as well as the respect and dignity that comes only with marriage." The same-sex marriage law was rejected 53 percent to 47 percent. Several other states will be voting on this issue next year, including Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire. As of now, three states have voted to extend marriage to same-sex couples and 27 states have banned it. These important decisions never went to the state legislature.
Regardless of any of our views on gay marriage rights, the question that has people across the country and throughout our campus wondering is whether or not this issue should be voted upon in a referendum in the first place. Do we, and should we, have the right to vote on other people's civil rights?
Though putting same-sex marriage rights to a public vote like Maine has done, and California did with "Prop 8," their state governments are placing this crucial decision in the hands of the majority. By doing so, a helpless minority of gay rights activists would never be able to win in the polls. The Supreme Court has yet to rule on gay marriage, as either it being a fundamental right or simple equality, but the very fact that the Court has the right to decide, and not a public vote, should tell us something.
Only the federal courts and legislators have the authority to decide if same-sex marriage is a fundamental constitutional right. Legislators from each state who vote on different issues are used to protect the minority, so why aren't these legislators the ones voting on this issue? By placing gay marriage rights to a public vote, the very structure of our country's political system is being turned on its head.
As writer Linda Hirshman of the The Daily Beast put it, "the combination has pulled the American political system in a radical new direction the founders of our country actively opposed." Considering the controversy that already exists around gay marriage rights, shouldn't the government be working to unite us, not further divide us?
Regardless of any of our views on gay marriage rights, the question that has people across the country and throughout our campus wondering is whether or not this issue should be voted upon in a referendum in the first place. Do we, and should we, have the right to vote on other people's civil rights?
Though putting same-sex marriage rights to a public vote like Maine has done, and California did with "Prop 8," their state governments are placing this crucial decision in the hands of the majority. By doing so, a helpless minority of gay rights activists would never be able to win in the polls. The Supreme Court has yet to rule on gay marriage, as either it being a fundamental right or simple equality, but the very fact that the Court has the right to decide, and not a public vote, should tell us something.
Only the federal courts and legislators have the authority to decide if same-sex marriage is a fundamental constitutional right. Legislators from each state who vote on different issues are used to protect the minority, so why aren't these legislators the ones voting on this issue? By placing gay marriage rights to a public vote, the very structure of our country's political system is being turned on its head.
As writer Linda Hirshman of the The Daily Beast put it, "the combination has pulled the American political system in a radical new direction the founders of our country actively opposed." Considering the controversy that already exists around gay marriage rights, shouldn't the government be working to unite us, not further divide us?