Agreement Does Not Equal Truth

A Polk County judge on Thursday concluded that Iowa's law against same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, and unfairly discriminates. District Judge Robert Hanson ruled that "the law violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the Iowa Constitution." No small matter, certainly, this issue of fairness and equality under the law. Predictably, there were equally loud outcries of ecstasy and agony. "Finally," said some. "Outrage," said others. Also predictably, the judge issued the next day a stay on the order, preventing its implementation pending appeals.

But whatever one's views on the merits of the issue in general and this case in particular -- whatever one's views on marriage -- it was the exclamation by one Iowa lawmaker that has given me pause. In vowing to "to take more steps to change Iowa law to prevent same-sex marriages," House Minority Leader Chris Rants, a Sioux City Republican, exclaimed, "I can't believe this actually happened in Iowa." What it means is that one person has decided they know better than the whole Legislature."

That last sentence. That's the one that interrupts me. I recognize the long tradition within democracies of "majority rules." Although there are typically safeguards in place to protect minority voices from being routinely tyrannized, we haven't really come up with an alternative to simply counting up the votes. We can change the definition of "majority" -- "simple" majority or "super" majority, for example -- but it still boils down to the "voice of the many" having say over the "voice of the few." That, I suppose, is democracy.

While I don't discount the importance of the majority's opinion, I wouldn't attribute to it too much substance. Weight? Yes. Substance? Not necessarily. Especially from a Christian point of view.

I haven't gone back to read the actual votes, but I'm relatively sure that the majority of legislators in various southern states during the 1950's and 1960's saw no problem with racially descriminatory laws that were currently the "law of the land." The majority.

While most American colonists were getting fed up with the heavy-handed policies of Britain, I would be willing to bet that the majority disapproved of the actions of a few who heaved crates of tea into Boston Harbor in 1773.

As I think about the biblical story, it was the majority opinion of those in charge that led to Jesus' crucifixion and Stephen's stoning. If a vote had simply been taken after the renegade Paul began to baptize uncircumcised Gentiles, most of us would not be in the church today. And reaching a bit further back, it appears that the majority of Israelites voted to return to Egypt. It was that "wild, activist judge" Moses who insisted they go forward toward Canaan.

All of which is to say that sometimes, every now and then, Mr. Rants, the majority -- even the "whole legislature" -- gets it...

...wrong.