The question isn't 'the vote'... but if the issue being voted on was legal. In the 60s, it was still illegal in many states for blacks and whites to marry. Jews being legally banned from certain country clubs. A woman not allowed to pilot in the military even if she is a better pilot than the man who got his wings? In fact, when Kennedy ran, people assumed he'd lose because no Catholic was ever elected before. These overturns are about civil rights being stomped on. So what you're saying is that 'majority' wants to vote to restrict all over minorities from equal rights, let them? Gays having the right to marry is not yours or mine to decide. Their marriages don't threaten anything. Thus, people who 'voted' against gays rights to marry, vote against democracy. Ignorance isn't an excuse to remove a person's civil rights.Ok, I don't really care if same sex people get married or are together in any capacity. I am for equal rights BUT.......... I am very annoyed that peoples votes don't mean anything anymore. What happened to a majority vote rules? What happened to the peoples voice?
My stance on this has nothing to do with same sex couples. This is just the latest thing a court has overturned or blocked that THE PEOPLE voted for. Look at AZ., look back at prop. 187 which would have saved is billions in illegal immigrant funding. The people of the USA are trying to make changes to better our country and the few judges are effectively disenfranchising us.
Again this is not directed at same sex couples it is major frustration over the majority loosing there voice.
However Arizona illegal issues are not about civil rights. That overturn had to do with congress being in the pocket of big business who stands to gain if cheap labor can be hired to build your homes.. etc. My greedy ass of a cousin is a lobbyist for this crap... and hundreds of millions are being invested into lobbying so that big business has a new 'gene pool' of laborers who will work for less. I'm from Arizona by the way. Beware... If the lobbyists can make this seem like it's about civil rights, then we lose. What needs to be corrected is the assumption that illegal workers are Mexican. We need to enforce our immigration laws across the board, Canada, Mexico, Russia, England ... whatever. All countries have laws that permit legalization. The reason there is a quota and rules have to do with security and budget. This has nothing to do with Mexicans, except that their illegals have chosen to ignore whatever of our laws are inconvenient.(But boy do they know about 'benefits' once they're here.) Cesar Milan is a Mexican hero. He snuck in, made a fortune, and now is 'legal'. So - voting against an AMERICAN's civil rights is what asses do and what eventually the constitution of a true Democracy must and will overturn. Changing immigration laws.. completely different case.