Prop 8 overruling a threat to democracy

Recently, a ruling came down from the California Supreme Court blocking the controversial Proposition 8, which would ban homosexual marriages in California.  I'm not going to debate the merits of the law and whether it should or shouldn't be enacted. I believe there is a much bigger danger in this court ruling, one that really threatens every state, not just California, and is about much more than marriage.

First, this is a highly divisive issue, with both Republicans and Democrats voting for this initiative, a fact that is lost in a lot of the reporting on the issue.  In the 2008 Presidential election, California's count was 5,011,781 for McCain and 8,274,473 for Obama, according to the CNN election results.  When looking at the numbers for Prop 8, a little over 7 million voted for the ban while almost 6.5 million voted no.  According to the Public Policy Institute of California, 77 percent of Republicans voted for the ban while 66 percent of Democrats voted no, so there were crossovers on both sides of the political parties.  According to exit polling reported in the New York Times, 70 percent of African-American voters voted for the ban; the majority of those voted Democratic.  In the final count, 52.3 percent voted yes and 47.7 percent voted no. A clear majority wanted this ban to be the law in California.

Lawsuits were filed by several parties almost immediately after the Nov. 2 elections.  In early August, Judge Vaughn Walker struck down the ban, saying that it was unconstitutional.  Appeals are being filed and most likely the case will end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.  I think the major danger in this ruling is that the judge went against the wishes of the people when the people had a clear vote and the ban was voted in.  If a judge can rule against the will of the people, why should people even bother voting?

There are a lot of laws I don't agree with, many of which I feel intrude on the rights of citizens.  As a Libertarian, I believe the government should not be in the personal lives of Americans.  But when a law that the majority of voters want is invalidated, it comes with a price.  In this case, do the votes cast even mean a single thing?  One side vilifies the other, and had the sides been reversed, there still would have been lawsuits filed; the danger would still be the same. Would that judge still go against the wishes of the voting public?  

With such a controversial issue, it's easy for both sides to get lost in the debate and the deep-seated feelings, but if nothing else, please consider this:  Next time, it may be another issue, another judge, another majority vote for something that gets overturned.  When that happens, the government, the judges – they are the ruling class and the wishes of the people will no longer count for anything, and we could lose everything that makes America a wonderful and free place.