So, I went to my first protest this morning. It was hot, crowded, and all I could hear and/or see was the signs of those in my general vicinity. I think this movement is important, so I'm glad I went, but I was a little underwhelmed in the process.
No matter what your feelings on same-sex marriage is, hear me on this. No popular vote should be able to restrict the rights of any minority group, especially when the popular vote is overriding a Supreme Court decision. We are not a democracy. We are a democratic republic. We don't vote on every decision; we elect those who vote on our behalf. If we start asking to vote on every decision our Supreme Court makes, we are undermining the authority of our leaders-- the leaders we have voted on and elected to make these decisions for us.
Unfortunately I got b*tch-slapped by one of the worst migraines I've had in years right in the midst of the rally. I'm not sure what brought it on, but the heat and crowd certainly didn't help. I took an excruciating bus ride home, promptly vomited when I go through the door, then took a cool shower, an imitrex, and laid on the couch in the dark with an icepack for an hour. The next hour I took a muscle relaxer, and moaned for another hour, at which point I took a second imitrex AND an ambien, hoping to at least sleep through part of this nuerological trauma. I dozed for another hour and finally got up and made myself something to eat. My head is only throbbing without 20% of the intensity it was a couple of hours ago. I can't believe I'm not asleep from the ambien, but I just sort of feel dull and in slow-motion. I think I'm parking on the couch with my DVR for the rest of the evening.
Hope everyone is having a great weekend!
3 comments:
J-
I like a good political rant as much as the next person, but I'd feel remiss if I didn't point our that we don't vote on the Supreme Court members. And even if you feel we effectively get to the same place because they are appointed by an elected President, the SC isn't in charge of making policy (in other words, they're there for "decisions" on interpreting law, which in theory is put in place by representatives of a majority of the citizens).
I don't write this from a viewpoint on any issue or to discourage involvement in the process-- far from it-- but just to point out certain parts of the process as I understand it, because knowing how it works I think helps understand how to influence it.
Cheers,
Scotticus
Thanks for commenting, Scotty. I BELIEVE (it's possible that I am wrong; I do not have it memorized) that the original wording in the California Constitution allowed for same sex marriages, so their original decision to legalize them was in fact, "interpreting" the law. And then the majority vote overturned that decision.
I agree with you on the last point, but I'd have to go to law school just to make sure.
Thanks, J. That's kinda where I was going with that. The SC made its call based on the law as it was previously worded, and I thought what Prop 8 did was address that law (since the democratic process allows a majority to make such an impact into the Cali Constitution itself). And so I think it's a difficult position for your argument to cite the former SC action, since today they would arrive at a different decision through interpreting the law.
Also-- I hope you are feeling better.
Cheers,
Scotticus
Post a Comment