Federalism Is A Messy Business, But The Best Way To Govern The United States

UPDATE:

Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz makes the case to leave the issue of same-sex marriage to the states. Maybe the supreme court will split the difference and uphold Prop 8 and strike down the Defense of Marriage Act based on federalism grounds? Hmm.


Yes, the United States of America is not a democracy but it is a federal republic and while that seems to be lost more and more every day, it bears a little bit of understanding.
Today, the supreme court finally heard the arguments in regards to Proposition 8, the 2012 measure passed by the California voters that the state recognizes marriage as between one man and one woman.
Understand that Prop. 8 did not take away any rights that same-sex couples. It simply affirmed that in the state of California, traditional marriage would be recognized.
But, the same-sex marriage advocates could not win at the ballot box, albeit it was close, so they took their case through the courts. And today is where a decision will be made as the nine-member supreme court decided yeah, we would like to figure all this out.
Why?
California voted as it did in 2012. If the advocates of same-sex marriage really wanted to, it could have taken the case to the voters again in 2010. Or 2012. Remember, the vote against Prop 8 was 48%. Which means that it is very possible if put to the voters once again, as it was written, it could lose.
But you see, this is what federalism is all about.
State by state the voters and or legislatures are deciding this issue. At this point, the reality is that in the just concluded election, three states either rejected traditional marriage amendments or supported same-sex marriage.And  this year, New York state and Maryland's legislatures voted for same-sex marriage and it is the law of those states.
Either the tide is turning or they are winning in parts of the United States that are more willing  to be supportive of same-sex marriage.
But what I do not think is good is when courts, as the case in Massachusetts, get involved and become super-legislatures and divine rights rather than let the process work in the court of public opinion or through the legislative process.
Especially when these kind of matters can very well be decided by only five people in black robes.
So many issues have been usurped by the federal government or the federal courts.
Abortion is a prime example.
In many ways, some states were already liberalizing their abortion laws. California had some of the most liberal ones and that credit, or black mark, goes to one Ronald Reagan as governor who signed then the most sweeping law that all but legalized abortion. Of course it turned out to be the largest regret of his two-terms as governor. But the point is that the debate was more than likely going the way of liberalizing abortion in a great swath of the nation. And some states would have toughened their laws.
But the supreme court took that away from the states, nationalized legal abortion across the land in the infamous Roe v. Wade decision of 1973. And believe me, that did nothing to end the debate only it began the resurgence of, for lack of a better term the religious right.
And as history shows, courts do not always get big decisions right. The most grievous being the horrible Dred Scott decision of 1857. That is one of the catalysts of the Civil War. So courts are not always saviors.
And one other thing that I wrote on my Facebook page today is that one of the most significant civil rights gains was not at the mercy of a court but in the hallowed halls of congress.
It was there that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. And with significant Republican support and strident opposition of Southern Democrats. And the courts, well they were nowhere to be found.
The most sweeping act was by the people through their representatives.
That is the way a federal republic works.
Some opposition by Republicans such as Sen. Barry Goldwater was not to preserve the evils of segregation but to not see the over reach of the federal government. The Southern Dems, not so much. They wanted to preserve their seats and a terrible way of life for Southern Black Americans.
The fact is that change does happen. Sometimes not fast enough for some. That is what is happening now in the whole same-sex marriage debate. Proponents keep using the courts when they can't win over the public and legislatures. And when they win it creates a backlash because the people do not like that courts make these important decisions over the people and their representatives.
To me, that is what the real debate is in all of this.
Federalism. And the continuing erosion thereof.

Explain If The American Public Is More Accepting Of Same-Sex Marriage Why Does It Keep Losing At The Polls?

Forgive the looong headline, but the point is that I do not get the meme of the Leftywhore media as to the supposed change of heart of Americans in regard to same-sex marriage.
And again, I am not advocating for or against, I think that there is a huge disconnect between so-called polls and what voters are saying across this Great Land.
Now since voting has occurred on this subject since 1998, 30 states have voted to varying degrees to affirm the meaning of marriage to that state between one man and one woman.
In the proceeding 14 years since the first vote in Alaska to the last one (before this past Tuesday in North Carolina), the numbers are staggering as to what the people have said.
Since 1998, 63,415,154 Americans have voted in referendums regarding the subject of same-sex marriage. And again, they have ranged from affirming traditional marriage to, yes, banning civil unions and also domestic partnerships. In all, 40,315,695 Americans have voted in 30 states before the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll vote in North Carolina to uphold traditional marriage. Only 23,099,459 have voted against or for eventual recognition of same-sex marriages. That translates to about 67% for traditional marriage and 33% against or to eventually redefine marriage.
And make no mistake. Again, no matter what you feel on the subject, it does redefine marriage recognizing same-sex unions.
But back to the raw data.
These votes have occurred in Blue of the Bluest states like California and Red as a tomato states as Alabama. And all have voted for the state to recognize marriage to be between one man and one woman.
Now to be fair, in 2006, Arizona became the first and only state to defeat a traditional marriage initiative on the ballot. But that was more restrictive and would not have recognized civil unions. So, in 2008, just marriage was on the ballot and it won handily.
The interesting numbers are in fact from 2008.
The Arizona initiative passed 56% to 44%. And Republican presidential candidate Sen. John "F--- You" McCain carried his home state.
In Blue as Blue California, while the Democrat candidate, Sen. Messiah Barack, was carrying the state with 61% of the vote, 52% of voters passed a marriage between one man and one woman. That is amazing in and of itself that it passed here. But it did pass.
And Florida was also being carried by Sen. Messiah Barack. But 62% of voters voted to affirm traditional marriage and ban civil unions.
But because of the closeness of the California vote, roughly about 56% of voters said at the very least that traditional marriage is all that should be recognized by the state.
Now I do not pull these numbers out of a hat. All one has to do is go to this link at Wikipedia and crunch the numbers as I did.
So, what is it?
Do we believe people who answer a poll or people that actually take the time in each state to vote for or against any of these measures?
Sorry proponents, gotta go with people who vote. I go with the fact that 63,415,154 people that have voted on this issue. Again, 67% of that number have voted in one way or another to affirm marriage as between one man and one woman.
So, is the public more accepting of same-sex relationships? I can say yes. Do Americans really want to redefine marriage. Not at all. Will a lot of Americans want some kind of allowance for same-sex relationships yet not call it marriage? That kind of depends what part of the United States one lives in.
Now, some states have passed legislation or been forced by supreme courts and not overturned those decisions to recognize same-sex marriages and perform them.
They are Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York state and Vermont. The common thread is that these are all Northeast and or New England states, except for Iowa.
But, most other states will not recognize these relationships as marriage.
And, like it or not proponents, that is the real number to look at.
And while no one for same-sex marriage wants to listen to me, an eeeeevvvvviiiiiilllll conservative, I will still offer a little advice.
One, if ye want to win people over, demonizing them and essentially calling them idiots and hoping for their deaths is probably not going to win over people.
Two, if you are in a committed relationship and the people you care about, or claim to care about, see that, they just may come around on their own in their own time. Something that you believe is worthwhile can not be rushed.
Three, recognize that those who believe in traditional marriage are not all bad, evil people. Most believe that while your intentions are good, there is a broader social ramification that you have not thought about or just do not care about. That is what other types of marriages could emerge. Polygamy, adult-child, relatives other than cousins. And that concern does not diminish your relationship. No one is seriously taking your relationship, good and great as it is, and saying your leading the way to the aforementioned. It is a real and genuine concern.
Forth, make the case that same-sex marriage is a great civilizer of those relationships. What most people see, especially at so-called Gay Pride parades is a freak show. It is what upsets a lot of people. And I am sure alot of same-sex couples don't exactly like seeing that as well. After all, they are not interested in a lot of the freakishness that is out there at those shows.
Again, I don't expect a lot of people who advocate same-sex marriage to actually take what I write and think about it. No, just go on Facebook and get into it with people who actually believe that the Dear Leader, President Obama, sudden change of heart on same-sex marriage is genuine. They are blinder than Helen Keller to actually get that maybe it is not all that it seems to be.
Which is the point of all this.
Polling data only goes so far. It depends on how questions are in fact and indeed asked and answered. The most important poll to look at is how voters actually vote when the question is put on the ballot.
Oh, and North Carolina voted for traditional marriage 61% to 39%.
So, please explain polls that show one thing and people voting a vastly different way.