He's definitely not a political scientist or historian:
There never were any "rights" granted or designated to those who dissented with the will of the majority, other than the same rights all citizens have to work through the democratic process to accomplish their purposes. No "rights" were ever granted to citizens on the basis of their sexual habits or lifestyle. There simply are no such "rights."
Slavery was abolished, blacks and women obtained the rights to vote, and these true rights were not obtained by threats and violent demonstrations and civil disruption (though these things did occur, of course), but by due process, congressional deliberations and appropriate ratification. This was democracy in action, not mob rule. As noted journalist Thomas Sowell has said, there never was "a right to win." In America, at least the America we've known till now, rights are earned and won in a deliberative, legal way – at the polls.
|
Arguably the US Constitution
does provide for the right to gay marriage insofar as it makes all citizens equal under the law. The case can be made that denying the privileges of legal marriage to same-sex couples while affording them to hetero couples violates this equal protection. So that's one place that gay marriage advocates find their "right" to marriage,Pat.
But when you say "there never were any "rights" granted or designated to those who dissented with the will of the majority," Pat, you reveal yourself to be a fool. The entire raison d'etre of the Bill of Rights was to protect those whose views and ideas dissented with the will of the majority, those accused of crimes, etc. Sounds to me like you're advocating for a tyranny of the majority, Pat.
And in other news, slavery was indeed abolished in part because of the "violent demonstrations and civil disruption" that we know as the Civil War.
Stick to singing, Pat.
No comments:
Post a Comment