Majority shouldn’t always rule (Leonard Pitts column on gay marriage)

[tblue37]

This should go without saying, f course, but until it does, it needs to be said constantly.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/mar/24/majority-shouldnt-always-rule/?opinion

Majority shouldn’t always rule
Leonard Pitts, Jr.

<snip>

It seems a majority of the American people now favor allowing gay men and lesbians to wed. That majority, according to a Washington Post/ABC News survey released last week, is slender, just 51 percent. But even at that, it represents a significant increase from just five years ago, when only 36 percent of Americans approved.

<snip>

It seems a majority of the American people now favor allowing gay men and lesbians to wed. That majority, according to a Washington Post/ABC News survey released last week, is slender, just 51 percent. But even at that, it represents a significant increase from just five years ago, when only 36 percent of Americans approved.

<snip>

Yes, the will of the people matters a great deal. Indeed, in a democracy, few things are more deserving of deference. But still, one draws up short at the idea that human rights are subject to a popularity contest. One shudders to think what sort of nation this would be if Lyndon Johnson, before signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Voting Rights Act of 1965, had first taken a poll of the American people.

<snip>

That’s the pebble in the shoe, the popcorn hull between the teeth, that nags at the conscience when one reads polls tracking how many of us approve of other people’s lives and decisions. It’s all well and good that 51 percent of us support the right of gay men and lesbians to tell it to the judge, but really, what hubris makes us think we have a right to say yea or nay in the first place?

[MineralMan]

1. With human rights, specifically, a majority of popular opinion

should have no influence. That is one of the reasons for the Constitution. Preventing a tyranny of the majority when it comes to individual rights is crucial. If anyone has the right to marry, everyone should have that right, unless there is some urgent and pressing reason why that right should not be available, such as incest or coercion.

Sadly, many do not understand that part of the Constitution. That is why it took so long for slavery to be abolished and for women to gain the right to vote. Oddly enough, the second thing took longer than the first.

Marriage is a right. Same-sex marriage is simply marriage. It is that simple. Why that is not recognized, I do not understand.

[tblue37]

4. People confuse rights and privileges all the time--in both directions.

They assume certain things are rights when in fact they are privileges--and vice versa.

[TalkingDog]

2. That's exactly why we are a Democratic Republic.

Democracy (small d) is mob rule. Everybody has a voice and the most votes win.

A democratic republic means that any minority's needs and concerns are represented in spite of the masses.

[tblue37]

3. Yes, at least that is the way it is supposed to be. Of course, the

way it is now, a minority rules--as long as it is a Republican minority. And no matter how large a majority of the people want something, the representatives ignore the people's wishes to kowtow to the wishes of their corporate masters.

But where human rights are concerned--and marriage is a right--the issue shouldn't even be up for a vote.

[RufusTFirefly]

5. "You and I cannot 'give' rights."

"You and I cannot 'give' rights. We can only acknowledge, respect and defend the rights human beings are born with." -- Leonard Pitts

Amen.

A lot of Americans who should know better don't understand those portions of the Constitution where the "tyranny of the majority" doesn't apply. First and foremost among them is the Bill of Rights.

The First Amendment doesn't grant you the right to free speech or to practice your religion only if a majority of Americans think you deserve that right. First Amendment rights (notwithstanding shouting "fire" in a crowded theater) are absolute.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment is similarly absolute in its scope:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.