Replies

So, if the “will of the voters” in the state of California were to pass a bill allowing for sexual relations between adults and children, you would expect everyone to stay out of the affairs of those voters, right?

I wouldn't be in favor of such a law, and I doubt many others would be, but let's say it did pass. That would suggest that society has accepted those types of relationships. Since children can't vote, that must mean a decent number of parents or other adults decided they were okay with that. If society felt that way, then laws banning such relationships would be futile. Who would enforce them? Who would be watching everybody at all times to make sure they weren't violated? If people were that accepting of it, it would be too widespread to keep on it.

Bottom line is, society has whatever morals it has. If government reflects it, it makes no difference. If government opposes it, will do so ineffectively. Two examples; Prohibition and Reconstruction. Despite Constitutional amendments, drinking and civil rights abuses continue during those times, respectively. You could pass a gay marriage amendment, but if society accepts homosexuality, the presence of a Constitutional amendment will do nothing to change that.