Quote:
Originally Posted by Dibbler
I think what they are talking about is this... In my state the government recently said that gay marriage is now legal. The problem is that that a couple years ago there was an item on the balot to legalize gay marriage. The no votes were at 80% and the government didn't like the outcome so they just went ahead and ignored the majority. What happens when the government decides that freedom of speech should be restricted too? You may say that this is comparing apples with oranges but once the government decides it can just ignore the majority whenever it doesn't like what it's saying we are really in trouble. I feel that this is happening now.
I could care less if two guys want to get married. I do care that the government feels that they can ignore what the people demand. After all this country is a country of the people for the people.
|
It IS apples and oranges, and the reason the courts can find things to be unconstitutional is precisely to prevent government from becoming a dictatorship of the majority.
In fact, an apt comparison would be if a majority voted FOR the restriction of freedom of speech.
You can't deny people basic rights afforded to others without due process, even if a majority of people think you should.