I do not know much about this case, so may be you can correct me:
The people of California have voted to define marriage as between a man & woman. These gay marriage advocates do not like this decision & so have gone the legal route to overturn it. The court has said sorry, but your own peers have arrived at this decision via a democratic process, so it is valid. Right so far?
What happened in Iowa etc. was awesome & it would be great if it was the case in the rest of the country. But social change takes time - & nobody likes that. However, when everyone else (whether they like it or not) is showing respect for democracy by following due procedure, it sounds like these guys are a bunch of sore losers, man! Am I missing something here?
Question
The people of California have voted to define marriage as between a man & woman. These gay marriage advocates do not like this decision & so have gone the legal route to overturn it. The court has said sorry, but your own peers have arrived at this decision via a democratic process, so it is valid. Right so far?
What happened in Iowa etc. was awesome & it would be great if it was the case in the rest of the country. But social change takes time - & nobody likes that. However, when everyone else (whether they like it or not) is showing respect for democracy by following due procedure, it sounds like these guys are a bunch of sore losers, man! Am I missing something here?