There has been no more controversial issue in American politics recently than the issue of gay marriage. With the Supreme Court currently deliberating over the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act, the fight for equality has moved even more into the spotlight.
The court is not expected to rule in favor of gay marriage, rather to strike down Prop 8 and DOMA and leave the issue up to the individual states. I already know there will be significant backlash from the media and the general public against their decision if it does indeed land on the side of states’ rights. However, in this case, the Court would be right to make that decision.
Democracy is rule of the people, by the people. However, recently, there has been a major discrepancy between what the average American wants, and what Congress and the president deliver. Exacerbating this problem has been the fact that the Supreme Court, rather than protecting states’ rights, has been flexing their judicial power more and more over the past 50 years or so. If they ruled in favor of marriage equality rather than letting individual states vote on it, a dangerous standard would be set.
Marriage is primarily a social construct with legal implications, such as visitation rights in a hospital. At the founding of this country, the definition of marriage was between a white man and a white woman, the woman virtually being the property of the man. Over time, due to changing social ideals, the social definition of marriage has changed, and the legal definition has changed along with it. 58 percent of Americans now believe gay marriage should be legal, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll. With this knowledge, you may be wondering why I’m arguing that the Supreme Court should leave the decision up to the states.
The current definition of marriage is restrictive and oppressive. However, it’s oppressive not just to gay culture, but also to cultures in which polygamy is tradition. Where’s their equality? If the Court decides to legalize gay marriage, in 50-100 years will we be back asking the Court to redefine this social idea again?
As I’ve already stated, the test of any democracy is to compare the will of the people to the legislation being pushed by their representatives. To put the legalization in the Court’s hands rather than in our own is to forfeit some of the power that we as citizens have in local elections to effect change, and to provide precedent through which the Court can make decisions on this and other social issues.
Why is this so dangerous, you might ask? The demographics of the Supreme Court don’t match the American public. The Supreme Court is also not elected by the American people. They’re a woefully homogenous group of affluent, rich, mostly conservative old people. Because of this, they cannot make decisions on social issues for the American people.
I truly believe marriage should be totally unrestricted. You should be able to marry who you want, when you want, however you want, regardless of religion, sexuality or ethnicity. However, putting this decision in the hands of the Supreme Court justices is a mistake. If we as a society want marriage equality (which polls show we do), this should be decided in our statewide elections through various referendums. By doing this, we can move closer to true democracy: for the people, by the people.
