Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
If I had a sense that the local officials involved were betraying the wishes and views of their local constituents, I would probably agree. If some mayor started leasing city space to NAMBLA, for instance, because he agreed with their views, in spite of local opposition, I would have a problem with it. But I get the sense that, in each of these places, the locals are supportive.
Of course, it may be that I'm just more willing to see the law broken when I agree with the justification. It's always easier to internally justify actions you agree with. I suppose I'd have a fit if some local official started issuing driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
|
I would agree with you if our system was organized that way, but it is not. The problem in CA is that the people of the State have expressed their will as to what should count as marriage. The proposition would have failed if limited to SF residents. So, does SF get the opportunity to determine which state laws it wants to follow and which it doesn't? And by extension, does CA get to pick and choose which federal laws it wants to follow?
