The Tyranny of the Majority

Polls are indicating that the marriage amendment will pass.

I agree – and I’ll too bet that the amendment will pass.

The majority rules.

But there is something called “the tyranny of the majority”.

Jefferson, Washington, Patrick Henry, all lived in a time and social context and I doubt they would have voted against this amendment either. However, were these men living today and in today’s context, and with the intelligence, and enlightened points of view they possessed, I wonder that they wouldn’t support gay rights? I wonder that they wouldn’t support the reality and the science about our homosexual citizens? I wonder that they wouldn’t see the more basic concepts of liberty, freedom, equality, to be inclusive of this minority that exists within our midst?

And what now for our fellow citizens who are homosexual? Who have endured the years of discrimination, bias, and prejudice that were the result of ignorance and fear? Are they to disappear back into the anonymity of their closeted lives? To try and blend in unnoticed into the general population?

And what permission will this win give to those who may now act out their fear and their ignorance against the gays in their communities?

I, for one, won’t see this as a great victory for the best traditions of our heritage. I won’t see this as a victory for democracy.

Comments

Anonymous said…
And what permission will this win give to those who may now act out their fear and their ignorance against the gays in their communities?

You are absolutely right that this is the objective (at least for the leadership) of the push to pass this amendment. And, as has been the pattern in other states facing anti-gay ballot initiatives, there could be an escalation of anti-gay violence leading up to election day. We have experienced a hate crime already in Loudoun this weekend. It is impossible to separate this incident from the climate that has been created in which pro-amendment leaders are repeating horrible things about the gay community in order to demonize us and incite fear and panic in voters.

It doesn't have to be this way. The polls you are reading have been grossly misrepresented, in particular the Mason Dixon poll released Sunday. That poll didn't ask about the amendment that will be on the ballot in November, it only asked about the first sentence of that amendment. When voters read the whole thing, support drops well below 50%. We can defeat this amendment if voters understand that they need to read the whole thing. Don't give up yet.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006 10:24:00 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Top 10 Consequences Of Voting Yes On The Virginia Marriage Amendment

The following is offered as there are opposing lists being circulated by the religious right. So, here are my Top 10 Consequences of Voting Yes on the Virginia Marriage Amendment. 1. Voting Yes is unnecessary, as marriage is already defined in Virginia by statute. 2. Voting Yes ignores the facts – ignores the accepted medicine and science on this subject. 3. Voting Yes to constitutionalize such a socially charged issue, in flux, is clearly in opposition to Jeffersonian Democracy. 4. Voting Yes is an unabashed ploy by cynical Republicans to get out their base. 5. Voting Yes is in opposition to the maintaining of a bright line between church and state. 6. Voting Yes could bring about a myriad of unintended consequences to unmarried heterosexual couples. 7. Voting Yes will continue to paint Virginia as a cultural backwater and an unfriendly place for the location of new high tech businesses. 8. Voting Yes will hardly benefit the thousands of children in gay families nor give hope to many...
Read more

I Am Ashamed That Eric Cantor Is My Congressman

I understand that most don’t have the leisure I have, as a retiree, to follow issues, to stay tuned to political debates, to spend time and become involved in local politics. However, it is appalling that those fellow citizens of my 7th District in Virginia have such a knee jerk reaction to this current financial crisis such as to swallow the political rhetoric of Congressman Cantor and to not see this partisan politician for who he is. To see Congressman Cantor spotlighted on national news holding up House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s floor remarks and using this as the reason that Republicans failed to pass their administration’s backed financial crisis bill was nauseating. Cantor was playing politics. Cantor was petty. Cantor was being used by his party handlers to try and shift this failure to reach accord onto the Democrats for political gain. Cantor was seen as a safe spokesman who is from the brightest red district of a red state with little formidable opposition to push this mal...
Read more

Yes Virginia, There Are Homosexuals – In Spite Of Mean-Spirited Marriage Amendments

You don't need to be a lawyer to write a marriage amendment apparently, but you could use some common sense. A high school student could have written a better amendment than the proposed Virginia marriage amendment. And if it weren't so poorly written, this topic wouldn't be the subject of debate and discussion all across the Commonwealth. Just using words like "approximate" and "qualities . . . of marriage" for example --- these words mean something different to every one who reads them. At least, you will have to admit that for a constitutional amendment to our Bill of Rights, this language is far from ideal. And more importantly is not easily and consistently communicated to the general populace. But why tiptoe around this. Delegate Robert Marshall has admitted in interviews and debates that he seized onto this quest after Lawrence v. Texas and his homophobia and obsession with sodomy (overlooking that oral sex within heterosexual couples is sodom...
Read more