Democracy Fetish Strips Constitutional Rights

California social conservatives unleashed their new weapon against same-sex relationships, democracy. They take issue with "undemocratic" judges who afford constitutional protections to same-sex relationships, and want to democratically amend the constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage; basically, democratic usurpation.

Should the constitution, designed to protect liberty, now be used to limit individual rights in the name of democracy? A short history lesson: the later-repealed Eighteenth Amendment which subverted the federal constitution into a criminal statute outlawing alcohol, exemplifies democratic excess. Interestingly, the only other amendment used to restrict the body politic relates to election law; the Twenty Second Amendment creates a two-term limit on the presidency.

Furthermore, an independent judiciary is inherently undemocratic; federal judges are appointed for life and California Supreme Court judges are first appointed by an independent commission then elected to 12-year terms. Freedom is not a popularity contest.

"Democratic" social conservatives embrace both undemocratic, autocratic leadership in Washington, and the very "undemocratic" judges who protect their gun rights and private property from an overzealous body politic. They should rejoice in any undemocratic expansion of freedom. Lynch mob "justice" is singularly democratic, but manifestly unjust.

Here is a gay Iranian couple at democracy's "alter."