That whole democracy thing

Don't let people get in your way...

Published on March 28, 2004 By Draginol In Politics

People talk about democracy. But do they really understand it? How about representative democracy? Basically it means that citizens (the people) make the rules that we live by. We do so by way of voting for legislatures who will pass laws that represent our will.

This was a major point of the Declaration of Independence. The law of the land would be decided by the voters through laws. It seems a simple enough concept. And for our nation's history, it has worked pretty well. When Americans concluded that slavery was an abomination, it voted for laws that outlawed it. When we decided that women should have the right to vote, we voted for laws that explicitly allowed it.

In every case, it has been laws, passed by the will of the people. Slavery wasn't abolished by a judge. Women weren't granted the right to vote because some mayor decided they should be allowed to vote. The people enacted laws to do that. That's the way democracy works.

And yet on the subject of gay marriage, some people would throw democracy to the wind. Has any federal or state legislature passed a law enabling gays to be married? Forget what position on the issue you take, you either favor democracy or you don't.

I do not approve of judges or mayors or whatever deciding that they will dictate decide for the rest of us. If gay marriage is to be legal, it needs to become legal as a matter of law. Laws passed by elected officials who were voted in to represent the will of the people.

That's what democracy is all about. If we slide into a system where individuals can declare new laws unilaterally, we slide further away into democracy and back towards what the American revolution was supposed to abolish.

So to those who support gay marriage, some advice: Make your case to the American people. Build support for your position. Lobby legislatures to pass laws. That's democracy in action and it's served this country well for over 200 years.

Comments (Page 2)

InfoGeek

on Mar 29, 2004

F.Y.I.

"if men were angels there would be no need for government" -- Madison, The Federalist No. 51

IG

jeblackstar

on Mar 29, 2004

Ahh, thanks, I may be a history professor, but not in colonial American History.

Cheers

Michael Johnson

on Mar 30, 2004

Activist Judges = liberal weirdos?
How quickly you forget that the people vote for Gore, but the judges gave the election to Bush.

messybuu

on Mar 30, 2004

Electoral college. Wasn't the first time either. Also, it was Gore who took the election to the judges.

Dylarama

on Mar 30, 2004

Interesting, but incorrect. 1) You assume that all national decisions are somehow made simultaneously by the voting masses. Not so. For every national debate, in our entire history, there have been substantial amounts of support for either side. What our government does is, more or less, allow a small, motivated group to affect a law, statute, etc. Case in point, slavery. It is possible that majorities did not favor the abomination from the nation's conception, yet it was allowed to persist. 2) We did not pass a law that explicitly allowed women to vote, nor are we ever required to pass a law to allow gay marriage. We don't have a law that explicitly says you can drive 55 MPH in a 55 zone; we have laws that say you cannot drive more than 55 mph in a 55 zone. We did, however, pass a law that restricted government ability to disallow women's suffrage. Point: Laws of this nature, governing certain contracts, civil rights, etc., are usually concerned with restricting governmental powers. And, 3) so called 'activist judges', civil disobedience by citizens as well as mayors, etc., has always been and shall always be a vital part of a functioning democracy. This is the way an organic body of laws develops -- by being tested. The legislature, in as much as it represents the 'will of the people' can only do that so far as it knows the will of the people.

Democracy is a twenty four hour a day goal; it does not just happen on election day. Furthermore, the development of a body of laws that both represents our will as a nation, and governs us justly and efficiently, is a long process that cannot be confined to the voting booth. You are witnessing democracy in action. My advice to you: Deal with it.

messybuu

on Mar 30, 2004

1) If the majority was against slavery (and in this case, the South didn't count as that was part of their punishment for trying to secede from the union), then they could have voted for candidates against slavery. 2) Considering that the entire point to amending the constitution to restrict the government's ability to disallow women's suffrage was to give them the ability to vote, whatever your point is seems to be irrelevant. 3) I didn't realize it was the duty of judges to promote their own political agenda. I also didn't realize that mayors didn't have to abide by the law. When you think about it, all people who break the laws are political activists only trying to test the validity of the law.

Democracy is a twenty four hour a day goal; it does not just happen on election day. Furthermore, the development of a body of laws that both represents our will as a nation, and governs us justly and efficiently, is a long process that cannot be confined to the voting booth. You are witnessing democracy in action. My advice to you: Deal with it.

In this case, democracy means not giving a crap about the will of the majority and just doing whatever you want.

Frogboy

on Mar 31, 2004

This isn't democracy in action, that's dictatorship in action. Democracy, by definition, is consent of the governed. That consent is delivered via the voting booth.

Sean Conners aka SConn1

on Apr 01, 2004

one last thought looking at people trying to define democracy to fit their arguement here...

i am reminded of the words of Ben Franklin, who stated ..."Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. "

any questions?

messybuu

on Apr 01, 2004

Is liberty when a lamb demands the wolves to change a behavior that is not affecting the lamb because it didn't like the way the wolves voted?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!