Is it fair to the minority gay population that anti gay marriage laws have been established by majority vote?

Question

Over and over again we have seen and heard our national officials and citizens debate, propose and make laws based on religious ideology, specifically Christianty. For example, anti gay marraige laws. These laws are based purely on religious ideology. Many of these laws were voted on and approved by our nations citizens.

Ideally our nation is set up on the belief of seperation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State".

This thought protects both the freedom to practice religion and protects our government from being over run by religious fanatics.

Even though a law was voted into existence by a majority vote by our peers, does that make it ok and fair for the minority gay population?

Answer 1

I understand your point, but just to make one thing clear, the separation of church and state spoken of so grandiously by Jefferson in the language you quote and established in our federal constitution had far less to do with keeping religion out of government than keeping a federal religion out of state governments. You see at the time many of the colonies had their own "state religion" and they didn't want a federal religion to trump theirs. Its all about federalism. Connecticut didn't disestablish their state religion until 1818, Massachusets until 1833. It wasn't until 1868 and the passage of the 14th amendment that even the "due process of law" and "privileges an immunities" were made binding on the sates. Nearly one hundred years later in 1947, the Supreme Court finally held that the 14th Amendment incorporated the religious freedoms found in the 1st Amendment to the states. The case was Everson v. Board of Education. So while we now understand that even the states cannot establish a religion, looking at our constitutional history probably serves both sides pretty well in an argument about the place of religion in our politics.

Answer 2

Keep two things in mind. The separation of church and state was intended (and written exactly to state) that the government cannot make laws respecting the "establishment" of religion. These marriage laws may reflect some christian values, but they in no way work to "establish" a religion through an act of the government. Many laws (murder, for example) have "roots" in religion (the 10 commandments), but are not "religious" laws. Second, this country's government (of the people and by the people) is based on a "majority rule" system. One man, one vote promises that a small minority cannot force the rest of the country to live in a way that they do not find acceptable. If your definition of "fair" is that someone can't do something that they want to, then possibly these laws are not "fair" to this minority. However, this DOES meet the definition of "fair" with respect to the country and Her citizens as a whole.

Answer 3

Jefferson may have written those words, but they were in a PRIVATE letter to a private individual. They are NOT in any of our founding documents.

We are a nation ruled by majority... hence our electoral process and the way we elect our leaders. Our leaders are there to enact the will of the people. Why should a minority (3%) be allowed to trample on the steady beliefs of the majority? Why is their opinion counted 100 times the majority?

Answer 4

first of all, everyone against gay marriage is not against it for religious points, even though that seems to be the case. it also has a lot to do with taxes, and other financial things. secondly, the consensus in the country is not to appease everyone, it is to appease the majority. unfortunately, laws can not make everyone happy (or pot would be legal), so the only way to make it as fair as possible is to vote. obvisouly if only gays could vote on gay issues the world would be different, and if only women could vote on issues like abortion we would have the same problem. society functions as majority and minority... there is no other way around it.

Answer 5

yes it is fair and no they are not based soley on religeous idealogy... its common sense ... a family consists of a man a woman and their children and its a unit ... u cant just decide u want to go against nature because u think ur not a part of it and drag kids into ur unatural unit and expect everything to be hunky-dory ..its MORE unfair to bend the desire of the majority to the wishes of the minority ...

Answer 6

Land of the free my ar*e