Quote:
Originally Posted by Ford Prefect
Gay marriage and gay rights are an example of how the legislative and judiciary bodies are getting involved in morality issues in a positive way. But just because one of their early examples is positive doesn't mean I want the judiciary/legislative powers to decide what's right and wrong for me. The legislative body (parliament) is at least elected, but the judiciary is not, nor is it answerable to an elected body even. It is a small body of the elite who I don't not trust to do what is right for the masses, or for individuals. As for the legislative body being up to the task, may I present Paul Martin, Stephane Dion, Jack Layton, Stephen Harper, Ralph Klein, Ed Stelmach, ad nauseam as examples of why they're not.
|
Ah, I see. Good point. I don't know about another option though. That list of politicians is kind of grim, but we did put them there to make decisions for us. From where I stand, I'd rather a human being deciding what is right and wrong rather than some being I don't believe exists deciding, or people who claim to represent said being telling me what's what.
Regarding judicial activism -- I guess, but I don't know that I really fear what they might get up to. Sure they are powerful, but really how much can they do? Even if they aren't elected, we aren't going to let them do anything crazy. Of course lots of people think that whole gay marriage thing is crazy and they've already started...