|
The problem is that this seems to be viewed as a gay issue, not a civil rights issue. If your state voted to ban extramarital intercourse (yes, even oral), I'd be willing to bet a lot of you might be pissed that it was even put fourth to a vote. Why would something so prevelant and fundamental in our society need to be legislated? The fact is that just because something is voted on doesn't make it right. This brings to mind the old arhument: what if 51% of the population voted to kill off the other 49%?
Yes, it is sad that the underlying message is that Texas society isn't ready to let go of it's condemnation of a homosexual lifestyle, but that isn't why this thread is in politics. This is in politics because some things shouldn't need to be voted on. Should we have to vote to be able to read or write? Should we be able to vote to have the right to speak freely? Absolutely not. BUT, despite the fundamental natures of free speech and free press, there are people in the US right now who would vote against it. What if 51% wanted to vote to amend the constitution in order to abolish free press? The reasonable 49% would be shocked to the very core that something like this was even put to a vote, let alone what possessed the 51%. I hope this is making sense.
|