Judges shouldn't override voters' will

On Aug. 6, the Daily Herald featured a story titled "The national debate over gay marriage." U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker overruled the will of 7 million California voters when he overturned Proposition 8 (California's gay marriage ban) that was passed by 52 percent in 2008. America is increasingly being ruled not by law or by our duly elected representatives but by unaccountable judges who are destroying the very fabric of what once made America great.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has made the general observation that "unelected judges have no place deciding issues such as abortion and the death penalty." To that list I would add marriage (one man and one woman), which has been the core building block of every major civilization in history. Of the 31 states that have put this question to a vote, all have said marriage is between one man and one woman. When our nation's people get to participate in the process, they support at the ballot box this most basic and natural concept that marriage is between one man and one woman and understand implicitly that all historical evidence (legal and social) points out that within the context of traditional marriage is far and away the best setting to raise children.

So why do we let one judge rule in favor of gay marriage and speak for millions of people who never elected him in the first place? Our nation as a republic is a nation in which the supreme power rests in the citizens entitled to vote. The Founding Fathers clearly established that our laws should come from the legislative body whose members have been duly elected by the people. The judicial branch overrode the will of the people because one judge has a personal preference that homosexual marriage is a good idea.

Larry O'Neill

Palatine