I don't mean that the separation of powers doesn't matter. I'm saying that it's not the complaint that's really driving this issue, and it's disingenuous at best to claim that it is. The people who voted down Prop 8 did so because they don't like gay marriage. Period. If the issue had been raised by some other mechanism, the opponents would have found a different reason to object to it.
To say that this all could have been avoided if same-sex marriage proponents had only chosen a more "democratic" approach is patronizing and sophomoric. No path to same-sex marriage is sufficiently by-the-book that opponents will decline to challenge the result.
I believe that for you the separation of powers is the real outrage here. I have no doubt that some of the California electorate do feel the same way. But they are a tiny, tiny minority here. Prop 8 was not a referendum on the proper role of the courts. It was a referendum on queers. Let's call a spade a spade.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 01:55 am (UTC)To say that this all could have been avoided if same-sex marriage proponents had only chosen a more "democratic" approach is patronizing and sophomoric. No path to same-sex marriage is sufficiently by-the-book that opponents will decline to challenge the result.
I believe that for you the separation of powers is the real outrage here. I have no doubt that some of the California electorate do feel the same way. But they are a tiny, tiny minority here. Prop 8 was not a referendum on the proper role of the courts. It was a referendum on queers. Let's call a spade a spade.