Gay marriage: a social revolution?

This has been criticised by many, not just proponents of Proposition 8, as 'undemocratic', however the role of this court was not to assess or to respond to the will of the people. It was charged solely with determining whether this Proposition should ever have been brought before the People in the first place, on the grounds that it breached the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution by denying a select minority the right to marry a person of their choice. This same Amendment was successfully invoked to overturn anti-miscegenation laws preventing blacks and whites from intermarrying. In any case, the 7 million votes recorded for Proposition 8 in California (=only 39% of its population) fall well and truly short of the federal majority required to amend the US Constitution.

Direct Democracy, in other words Anarchy, would succeed only if the population were all sufficiently well educated and in possession of all the facts. This is why governments are allowed to get on with the job once they have convinced the electorate of their competency and probity to do the job. Handing 100% of the power over to the people means you wouldn't need government at all.

Speaking for myself, I elect politicians into high office to act not only in the interests of the majority, but also in my best interests. If I am not happy, I can lobby for change, vote differently next time, or stand for public office myself.

I think the present system serves the interests of the majority better than some might realise. Trampling over minorities doesn't serve the country in the long run. As we have already seen to our great cost, terrorism can be practised by surprising small numbers of people with devastating consequences for comparatively large numbers of people.

I have never heard gay and lesbian lobbyists ask for any more than an equal share of the wealth and benefits we all participate in creating.