And the process of litigation - the public educative function of the courts - has clearly pushed opinion in favor over the years. Just having this issue in the public realm as one generation grew up has transformed public opinion. I see this dynamic as a distinctly American one, where the three branches of government and the people address emerging social issues in a messy, but healthy way.
To me, this sounds very similar to how same-sex marriage was legalized in Canada. In 1999, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that same-sex couples have the right to civil unions. Then, a series of provincial court rulings legalized same-sex marriage in various provinces. By 2005, same-sex marriage was legal in 8 of 10 provinces (with Alberta and PEI abstaining) and 1 territory (go Yukon territory!). In 2005, Paul Martin's Liberal minority government passed a law legalizing same-sex marriage in all of Canada. In 2006, Stephen Harper's Conservative minority attempted to re-open the debate, but lost the vote by a margin of 175-123.
Mark Lehman has done some interesting work (pdf) on the change in Canadians' attitudes towards same-sex marriage.
In large part, the majority support that citizens held by 2004 came about as the result of shifts in attitudes, values, and beliefs, rather than because of demographic factors.
In short, rather than having opponents of same-sex marriage die of old age, public opinion changed because individuals' opinions changed. And here is the graph:
To paraphrase Sullivan:
And the process of litigation - the public educative function of the courts - has clearly pushed opinion in favor over the years. Just having this issue in the public realm as one generation grew up has transformed public opinion. I see this dynamic as a distinctly democratic one, where the three branches of government and the people address emerging social issues in a messy, but healthy way.
No comments:
Post a Comment