Hi Bill, thanks for the response. I’m an attorney (American, unlike Doc
), so I’m familiar with the laws themselves.
What value to you attribute to the consensus of public opinion? I agree that consensus is a good thing, especially in our pseudo-democratic society, but I’m sure you’d agree that a consensus (or lack thereof) could easily be wrong. Just take your pick of issues from the civil rights era, and there were times when public opinion came out on the wrong side.
Good point about the ability of consensus to be wrong, although I would characterize in a different way. I would say that sometimes the perception of the consensus lags reality.
Let me give you an example, actually, let me expand on one of your examples. You bring up the struggle for Civil Rights, which is really a good example. But I would contend that the “hearts and minds” of white Southerners changed well before the law changed. In fact, I would assert that if the hearts and minds hadn’t changed, then implementation of desegregation and political enfranchisement would have been impossible.
As evidence for both of these assertions, I would cite the very low level of actual violence and resistance to the implementation of desegregation and Black political enfranchisement in the 1960s, especially compared to the level in the 1860s, in aftermath of the Civil War.
I would also note, that in a democratically based system, if you’re at all serious about the “consent of the governed” thing, you are pretty much stuck with the consensus you have. The best you can do is go back and correct injustices after the fact as we did with Japanese-Americans (
Korematsu v. United States) and Blacks (***Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka).
***Attempting to circumvent the will of the majority will be generally be problematic as it was with Prohibition, and is with speeding. Another good example, which pro-lifers might profit by (IMHO) is MADD. Mothers Against Drunk Driving was formed in 1980 by a woman whose child was killed by a drunk driver. That organization initiated public education efforts that were instrumental in creating a groundswell of opinion against drunk driving. In the past 30 years DUI has gone from being a semi-serious but still routine traffic offense to being a very serious offense indeed. A a result, between 1982 and 2005, alcohol related auto fatalities dropped 35%. We’ve made similar progress against domestic violence, using much the same tactic of education and changing the social environment.
Notably, both spousal abuse and DUI have
always been illegal, but neither were effectively addressed until the social acceptability of them changed. As the social norm changed, the laws got tougher, not the other way around.
So, yeah, I believe we need education and a change in the social environment first, then the laws will change.
