I’ve been thinking a lot about “Prop. 8” lately…. It’s rather odd, actually…
- I don’t live in California (where Prop. 8 actually happened);
- I’m not Gay (whom Prop. 8 seeks specifically to prevent marriage for, by changing the state constitution);
- I’m not connected - in any way - to the Mormon church (who were so involved in Prop. 8 that I find myself rather hoping they lose their tax-exempt status, but knowing that they won’t)
- It doesn’t directly effect me in any way, shape, or form (although it DOES directly effect a number of people I care about and respect)
The reason I’ve been thinking about Prop. 8 a lot lately is because I’m deeply concerned with what it does on a political level…. Whatever you happen to think about the theology of gay marriage or the relationship between the institutions of legal marriage and religious marriage, Prop. 8 says that the theological voice of “the many” (at any given point in history) can somehow overpower the political and legal status of “the few.” Or, to be more precise, the majority can legislate against those in minority… and not just legislate against (legislation is often temporary - it’s changed, updated, and thrown out on a regular basis) but actually change a state constitution (which should be above the whims of a particular time period).
Partly this is a problem with democracy. A pretty good argument can be made that it may often be the best system of government, but it has some incredible flaws - the most glaring of which is that democracy, at a basic level, prevents governments from doing what governments are supposed to do: protect their people - both from those “outside” who would seek to overcome the nation and from those “inside” who would seek their own personal gain with a fervor that often uses, misuses and abuses those who are in a minority or who have no political voice or power.
So, I believe a fundamental responsibility delegated to governments is to protect those who do not have a majority voice from those who do. Majority may rule in a democracy but majorities are often not “right.” Majorities are also set in time. As the history of race-based inequality has taught us, the difference between a position being in a majority and the same position becoming a minority view is simply a few decades.
Here’s where I think conservative Christians (and, indeed, all Christians) should hope that the California Supreme Court overturns Prop. 8 (regardless of whether or not they think gay marriage is right or wrong): I believe that state (and national) constitutions - indeed, governments themselves - ought to protect people from their time-period’s particular majorities.
Prop. 8 aside, Christians may be capable of scraping up a majority vote right now… in 10 years we may not be… in 20 years we almost certainly will not be able to. Who knows what theology will be in majority in 5, 10 or 20 years?! Do we want a legal system where majority can constitutionalize their theology against a minority? I sure hope not!
(Oh, and for the record, I don’t think it’s legitimate to try to make the argument that it’s really about being “pro-traditional-marriage;” while that may make a good argument, even the most conservative people I know admit that it’s about being “anti-gay-marriage.”)
Grace and Peace,
`tim
