My feelings about this issue are well documented in this thread.

The California Supreme Court, however, was not passing judgement on the issueof same-sex marriage, but on the qualification of the process of modifying the State constitution by means of a popular referendum. They did not, apparently, address the issue of whether the act itself was counter-constitutional, merely the porocess of enacting it.

I believe this is a flawed method, because it allows no dampening effect against mass reactionary thinking, one of the most severe dangers to a constitutional democracy. The contrast between mass reactionary thought and the ideal model of educated and informed citizens debating and then voting is dramatically illustrated here, as it was in the McCarthy era, and as it has been in many other moments in recent history. California's referendum system has a certain beauty to it, but it needs to be said that it does enable rash thrusts to be embodied in law. It could be argued the the same thinking that laid down Proposition 13 is a contributing vector to the current near-bankruptcy of the State budget, in that it slashed a revenue stream without responsibility for meeting budgetary commitments.


A