It has often been said that the states are great test labs for figuring out what works on new programs before they take the national stage. On the issue of gay marriage, some states have opted to amend their constitution to forbid it by putting it to a vote before its citizenry. The reasoning goes that it is better to take it to the people for a decision instead of having it imposed by the judicial branch as it happened in Massachusetts in 2004.
In 2000 California voters chose to define marriage as the exclusive union between a man and a woman. In 2004 San Francisco's Mayor Gavin Newsom issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples which were later invalidated by California's Supreme Court but the Court did not address whether the ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Last week the California legislature passed a bill that would allow gay marriage in the state and now this bill faces the terminator, Gov. Schwarzenegger, who pledges to veto the bill. The Governor has taken the position that the issue needs to be resolved by the people or the courts and not imposed by legislature, especially since the electorate voted for the definition of marriage in California.
So round and round it seems to go, the voters vote, the legislators legislate and the judges judge but the issue still remains. The democratic process seems to be running its course, hopefully it won't remain just a process and it will bear fruition into a cohesive policy.
al
No comments:
Post a Comment