Technically so does the UK ban same-sex marriage. Once a Brit gay couple marries in Canada for example, upon return to the UK, the government downgrades it and will only recognise it as a civil partnership, refusing to read a legal marriage certificate for what it truly is. I find that offensive. If they’re so equal, why can’t straights have them if they don’t want to marry? At least New York state that doesn’t yet have marriage equality recognises same-sex marriages performed elsewhere along with Washington, DC. What does that say about the U.K?
Hence why we do not live in a democracy. If we did, and 51% of the population wanted to stone you to death, then legally they could. The constitutionally-limited republic works okay, but the sentiment still favors the majority. Of course, no one has ever accused most people out there of being too bright to begin with.
Actually, Comment by The Truth, in civil rights issues and marriage equality falls right into this category,it is clear that democracy must guarantee the expression of the popular will through majority rule, it is equally clear that it must guarantee that the majority will not abuse or use its power to violate the basic and inalienable rights of the minority. A defining characteristic of democracy must be the people’s right to change the majority through elections. This right is the people’s “supreme authority.” The minority, therefore, must have the right to seek to become the majority and possess all the rights necessary to compete fairly in elections—speech, assembly, association, petition—since otherwise the majority would make itself permanent and become a dictatorship. For the majority, ensuring the minority’s rights becomes a matter of self-interest, since it must utilize the same rights when it is in minority to seek to become a majority again. This holds equally true in a multiparty parliamentary democracy, where no party has a majority, since a government must still be formed in coalition by a majority of parliament members.
These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous please click "Report" or email us. Terms and Conditions · Privacy Policy
Technically so does the UK ban same-sex marriage. Once a Brit gay couple marries in Canada for example, upon return to the UK, the government downgrades it and will only recognise it as a civil partnership, refusing to read a legal marriage certificate for what it truly is. I find that offensive. If they’re so equal, why can’t straights have them if they don’t want to marry? At least New York state that doesn’t yet have marriage equality recognises same-sex marriages performed elsewhere along with Washington, DC. What does that say about the U.K?
Brave judge. I hope her ruling survives. Letting majorities define the fate of minorities isn’t democracy, it’s mob-rule.
Hence why we do not live in a democracy. If we did, and 51% of the population wanted to stone you to death, then legally they could. The constitutionally-limited republic works okay, but the sentiment still favors the majority. Of course, no one has ever accused most people out there of being too bright to begin with.
Actually, Comment by The Truth, in civil rights issues and marriage equality falls right into this category,it is clear that democracy must guarantee the expression of the popular will through majority rule, it is equally clear that it must guarantee that the majority will not abuse or use its power to violate the basic and inalienable rights of the minority. A defining characteristic of democracy must be the people’s right to change the majority through elections. This right is the people’s “supreme authority.” The minority, therefore, must have the right to seek to become the majority and possess all the rights necessary to compete fairly in elections—speech, assembly, association, petition—since otherwise the majority would make itself permanent and become a dictatorship. For the majority, ensuring the minority’s rights becomes a matter of self-interest, since it must utilize the same rights when it is in minority to seek to become a majority again. This holds equally true in a multiparty parliamentary democracy, where no party has a majority, since a government must still be formed in coalition by a majority of parliament members.
Perhaps Texas need to create a Defence of Divorce Act. Divorce should only be between one man and one woman ;-)