Rosemary at Dean's World (really enjoy the blog FYI), writes about how instead of attacking gay marriage, No-Fault Divorce should be attacked first. I think she has a very good point. Here's my only question though. Say 35% of the population thinks that No-Fault Divorce is bad and would prefer Fault Divorce. 35% of the population thinks No-Fault Divorce is no big deal, but opposes gay marriage. 30% of the population thinks both No-Fault Divorce and gay marriage are okay. What should happen? Well in a democracy, we would have no-fault divorce but no gay marriage either. It is then no consolation to the 35% who are opposed to No-Fault Divorce to tell them...Well, too bad you lost that battle, so now you get to lose this battle too even though they now are part of the majority on the gay marriage issue. That just doesn't seem like how democracy ought to work.
Posted by Joel at February 27, 2004 04:31 PM | TrackBackThis is the problem with democracy.
Democracy works on the principle that the majority is right 51% or more of the time.
Unfortunately, it means that we can be inconsistent at times because the majority is sometimes wrong.
But that last statement assumes that what is "right" is consistent too.
Posted by: John A. Kalb at February 27, 2004 04:48 PM (Permalink)