There isn't a whole lot to be said about this decision.

The ruling declared that

It is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it.

But, in fact, the process specified by the state constitution does not allow any-and-all amendments that can find support amongst a plurality of voters. The court chose to put democracy ahead both of the constitution and of personal freedom.

Tags: bisexuality, election, gay marriage, homosexuality, marriage, same-sex marriage

This entry was posted and is filed under commentary, ideology, news, public. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.