Hoping for Justice

On Wednesday night, Steve, Aidan and I drove to Riverside to attend one of 28 candlelight vigils  in California to unite in solidarity and send a unified message, on the eve before the California Supreme Court Justices were to hear the oral arguments on the validity of Prop 8.

Inland Empire equality seekers turned out in great numbers and we participated in a passionate march around the streets of Downtown Riverside.  I saw many old friends and met many new ones.  It was wonderful to be in the company of people that believe in justice for everyone; regardless of the gender they happen to love.

 At the end of the vigil, we all sang "This Little Light of Mine."  (awwww...how cute are we, right?)

The hearings were quite interesting.  I came away hopeful, yet a bit apprehensive at being too confident.  If you didn't hear the oral arguments and would like to, you can hear it here just click on "MP3 Broadcast of March 5th Hearings."

In a Time.com article, it was pointed out the reservations of two of the justices who helped to create the gay marriage historic decision.  Justice Joyce L. Kennard said, "You would have us choose between these two rights: the inalienable right to marry and the right of the people to change their constitution. You ask us to willy-nilly disregard the right of the people to change the constitution of the state of California. But all political power is inherent in the people of California." 

However, I believe that the majority is not always equipped to make decisions for society as a whole.  That would be a tyranny of the majority and place the majority's interests above all else. It is still essential that decisions must remain Constitutional and judgment must distinguish those which are reasonable and fair from those which are tyrannical, unfair, and intolerable to the minority.  It is essential that tyrannical laws are prevented from being passed and this is what I hope the California Supreme Court remembers.

The Federalist Papers contain many references to the "tyranny of the majority."  In Federalist Paper 51, James Madison wrote: "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."  Think of the damage that could be done if the majority always "ruled."  The Founding Fathers were mindful of the principal that the majority cannot simply do away with the rights of the minority.  I hope that the justices of the California SC remember this basic fundamental.  We shall know in 90 days; hopefully sooner.  Until then, keep those "little lights" shining.  

Over & Out, j-boo

 

Comments

[sushimum]

Awesome, awesome, awesome. I love you and am so proud of you!!! -Jamie xo

[Steve]

That was a fun night and a great experience.

[Wen]

Wow, I'm so glad to see so many people turn out for this, Jinxi! What a wonderful experience!!

xo Wen