--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Seems like the NJ SC is not willing to push the Full Faith and Credit > > > issue. But I imagine it's a good-sized win for gay rights activists. > > > > If you consider maneuvering outside of the democratic process to get > > what you want to be a "good-sized" win..... > > It has been in the past. Constitutional rights exist as a restraint on the > majority. It doesn't always work properly, because of bad faith (for > example the Supreme Court approval of the internment of Japanese citizens in > WWII), but constitutional rights are intended to be a restraint on the > majority.
Yes, but what is the origin of constitutional rights? Constituional rights do not come straight out of the ether. After all, what constitutes a constitutional right in the United States is far different from what constitutes a constitutional right in the UK, or in the EU, or in Canada or Australia. Rather constitutional rights are drafted in a democratic process, by the majority, to be a future, binding restriction on the majority. So, the question is, do constitutional rights drafted in a democratic process actually *mean anything* - or are they wholly subject to the whims of interpretation? If elites can simply decide that a constitution says whatever it wants it to say, do we really have a rule of law? Or do we simply have a modified oligarchy? > Also, as an aside, your view sounds very much like the view of a Log Cabin > Republican friend of mine. I know he isn't homophobic :-), and my guess is > that you are not either. I don't see it in your posts....the implied caveat > in my statement is a reflection of not actually being around you in RL. Thank you for not subjecting me to the all-too-typical "homophobia" charge that I am usually subjected to. The ironic thing is that if I were a member of the New Jersey State Legislature, I would probably vote for a bill that rather closely resembles this decision. I am aghast, however, at the way this decision was handed down.... > Looking down, I found a poll which does not indicate quite as serious a > shift, and another that shows a similar shift. I found none that show > opinion swinging in the other direction. My point was not about creating majority opposition to gay marriage.... it was about creating an inspired, activist, core minority..... JDG - Noticing that nobody bothered to respond to my last questions.... _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
