Having it Our Way

When it comes to laws, I respect all laws that are decided by the people. I may not like the law, but since a majority of the people decided the law over legislators and courts the law is not political decided, but democratically decided. For instance, the people of Colorado recently legalized marijuana and placed a limit on campaign contributions. I am against these laws and although they conflict with federal laws, I prefer issues that are passed by referendum and decided by the people. I also prefer when these issue are decided on a state by state basis because they are controversial – this is the best way to compromise on these issues (same states will legalize marijuana while others will not).

A lot of people like to pick the laws they prefer regardless if they were decided by the people, the states, the federal government, or courts. I do not understand this because this is not Democracy. Sure, it would be nice for all policies to meet my criteria, standards, and ideology, but it is just not practical. And this is a big reason for polarity in this country, we expect everything to go our way and that is simply not realistic. For example, a lot of liberals are happy Colorado legalized marijuana and placed restrictions on campaign contributions. At the same time they are against laws passed by the people of other states that may place restrictions on stem cells, defend marriage between men and women, pass stricter voter ID laws, or pass stricter immigration policies. Yet, even though many of these laws do not conflict with federal law, people are against them solely because of their beliefs. People are impatient and unwilling to enforce the will of the people and therefore expect local, state, and federal legislators and courts to intervene and interfere against the will of the people. This is not democracy.

Case in point, gay marriage is a good example. Many people are outraged that the people of many states voted against gay marriage. Unwilling the uphold the will of the people, the courts intervened on the issue. Now the case is before the Supreme Court. It would be wrong for the courts to rule on this issue one way or the other. Many liberals are still outraged over the Supreme Courts unwillingness to interfere and overturn lower court rulings in the Dred Scott case. But the court was right to not interfere hence, slavery was abolished much faster than if the court did interfere. The Supreme Court, on the other hand, was wrong to interfere on abortion rights. This has led to 40 years of political fights simply because the courts would not let the people of each state decide the issue.

Over time, public opinion changes, and eventually gay marriage may pass a majority of states. In fact, in a decade or two legalization of gay marriage may have enough votes to become an amendment to the Constitution. Although it takes time to overcome stigmas and perceived injustices, it will happen if it is the will of the people. This happened for slavery, civil rights, and it happened for women’s rights. These all became amendments to our constitution and this is the right way to overcome controversial issue, not by having the courts and legislators interfere with the rights of the people.

Eventually, we may have legalized marijuana and gay marriage in our country. I may not fully agree with these issues, but if it is the will of the people and they become amendments to our constitution – who can argue with our great democratic system.