![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Why Maine Matters
Nov. 4th, 2009 10:27 amI’m a churning mix of emotions this morning reading about the passage of Ballot Question 1 in Maine, rejecting a state law legalizing same-sex marriage. I feel angry, sad, and nauseous. I’m also struck by the number of people (on Facebook and elsewhere in my online social networks) who are completely unaware of the whole thing. Why should they be, after all? It’s not their state and, quite often, not their issue.
Here’s why what just happened in Maine matters: it not only reinforces the idea of shoving gay people back into the closet and encourages the forces of discrimination in this country, it supports the idea that the majority should get to decide on the rights of the minority. Think about that for a moment. Consider what it is like to have your personal rights, your future, decided by a public referrendum of people with basically no stake in giving you anything, and likely some reasons to leave things as they are. It’s called “the tyranny of the majority” and it is a key reason why the judiciary in our country is supposed to have the power to say “no” to majority decisions that violate the spirit or letter of the rule of law.
Opponents of minority rights get all up in arms about “activist judges” who are “legislating from the bench.” They whip people up into a mob mentality over how their right to vote, their ability to decide is being “taken away from them.” Well, here’s news for you: sometimes the majority is just plain wrong. Sometimes, society needs an independent judiciary, with the kind of tenure it takes to stand up to the majority and say, “This is what is right and fair and in the spirit of our laws.” More often than not, these decisions are progressive: after all, if they didn’t go against majority opinion, then they wouldn’t be necessary in the first place, would they?
How long would it have taken the majority of voters to outlaw slavery, or segregation, or establish civil rights, or a woman’s right to control her own body, or any of the numerous landmark decisions of the US Supreme Court? Would they have done them yet?
If there are any “activists” in all of this trying to take anything away form anyone, it is the anti-civil rights and so-called “pro-marriage” types, who not only want to ensure gay people don’t get the same rights they currently enjoy (not “special rights,” the same rights as everyone) but also want to undermine one of the fundamental elements of our system of law and government when it fails to serve their agenda. They resort to mob rule tactics because it’s all they have left: whipping people up with fear-mongering and sending them rushing to the polls to stop “those people” from carrying out the vague threats promised in attack ads and editorials. It’s the modern, electoral version of angry peasants with torches and pitchforks, a latter-day witch-hunt.
What happened yesterday in Maine, and previously in California, may have been legal, and may have been democracy in action, but don’t for a minute think that it was fairness or justice. The state can legislate that I am less of a person than others all it wants. The fearful majority can try to take away my rights. But I know the truth, and they can never take away my dignity, self-worth, or my willingness to fight for those rights that are due all people; not just for myself, but for the generations who will look back and wonder at the culture that could have been so narrow-minded and afraid.
This is far from over.
Here’s why what just happened in Maine matters: it not only reinforces the idea of shoving gay people back into the closet and encourages the forces of discrimination in this country, it supports the idea that the majority should get to decide on the rights of the minority. Think about that for a moment. Consider what it is like to have your personal rights, your future, decided by a public referrendum of people with basically no stake in giving you anything, and likely some reasons to leave things as they are. It’s called “the tyranny of the majority” and it is a key reason why the judiciary in our country is supposed to have the power to say “no” to majority decisions that violate the spirit or letter of the rule of law.
Opponents of minority rights get all up in arms about “activist judges” who are “legislating from the bench.” They whip people up into a mob mentality over how their right to vote, their ability to decide is being “taken away from them.” Well, here’s news for you: sometimes the majority is just plain wrong. Sometimes, society needs an independent judiciary, with the kind of tenure it takes to stand up to the majority and say, “This is what is right and fair and in the spirit of our laws.” More often than not, these decisions are progressive: after all, if they didn’t go against majority opinion, then they wouldn’t be necessary in the first place, would they?
How long would it have taken the majority of voters to outlaw slavery, or segregation, or establish civil rights, or a woman’s right to control her own body, or any of the numerous landmark decisions of the US Supreme Court? Would they have done them yet?
If there are any “activists” in all of this trying to take anything away form anyone, it is the anti-civil rights and so-called “pro-marriage” types, who not only want to ensure gay people don’t get the same rights they currently enjoy (not “special rights,” the same rights as everyone) but also want to undermine one of the fundamental elements of our system of law and government when it fails to serve their agenda. They resort to mob rule tactics because it’s all they have left: whipping people up with fear-mongering and sending them rushing to the polls to stop “those people” from carrying out the vague threats promised in attack ads and editorials. It’s the modern, electoral version of angry peasants with torches and pitchforks, a latter-day witch-hunt.
What happened yesterday in Maine, and previously in California, may have been legal, and may have been democracy in action, but don’t for a minute think that it was fairness or justice. The state can legislate that I am less of a person than others all it wants. The fearful majority can try to take away my rights. But I know the truth, and they can never take away my dignity, self-worth, or my willingness to fight for those rights that are due all people; not just for myself, but for the generations who will look back and wonder at the culture that could have been so narrow-minded and afraid.
This is far from over.
