just becuse some thing is leagle does not make it morally right, or wrong. that is a different standard. Wright or wrong should be considered to be in a tecinal sence, or vilateds the principles of the constution. There is too much of people going to court to by pass the democratic system. The time to make your diagreement knowen is befor the masure pass. It is not uncommon for people to be fooled by good press and teh reason for free press is so every point of view can be heard.
There is petitions and there is the constitution. The thing about democracy is there is a chance of something called tyranny of the majority. Constitutions, petitions and transparency avoids this from happening. Once the system is secure and set in a way to avoid this, a communist could be in power and still have no authority.
I'm not exactly sure. lol. I got this question for my history homework: If something is legal, can it also be immoral or wrong? Can the majority of voters be wrong? If you said yes, what recourse does the minority have? I answered the first and second part but have no idea what to say for the third part.
If you live in a republic... then you have the precedent of established laws to appeal to. This is what the judicial branch or the US government is there to oversee. A simple majority cannot pass laws that conflict with those already established.
Thank you. This helped a lot.
???? what do you mean?