Originally Posted by UGLY

I heard an argument on the radio the other day and want to present it to you.

What is more important in our society the process in which we make or change our constitutional laws or does the outcome trump the process?

I n light of the California supreme courts decision this week to allow gay marriage they have essentially created law (the job of the legislature) instead of doing what they are supposed to do and interpret the law as it is written. In other cases through out our history the courts have done similar things Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v Wade. While the outcomes of these cases may have given us the desired and correct outcome (depending on your view of abortion) was it worth it? Was it worth the court over stepping there rights and creating laws in what they view as justice. In the Brown case many judges who would be on the supreme court later have argued that the constitutionality of the law being fought was never challenged by the law but rather by science that said kids felt bad and couldn't learn in a segregated environment. The judges interpreted the science and made a judgement that was not based on the constitution.