(July 1, 2014 at 5:10 pm)blackout94 Wrote:(July 1, 2014 at 5:08 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Because they are *rights* and not privileges, and putting them at the whim of the electorate is precisely how we get tyranny of the majority.
In this case it's a conflict - We can have a tyranny of the majority or a tyranny of the minority - What' worse?
Please explain how protecting a minority's civil and individual rights can be construed as "tyranny".
(July 1, 2014 at 5:10 pm)blackout94 Wrote: I really can't answer. But you made a good point, gay rights shouldn't be on referendum, I was just giving an example. If I vote for a conservative party let's say, I'm already voting intrinsically against abortion, if I vote for a liberal one, I'm voting to support legalization, and I'm a man.
Yep, and in places where rights are subject to statutory law, that might fly. Here, where such rights are protected under the nation's Constitution, statutory law cannot override Constitutional law.
