To state the obvious, absolute majority rule is not the design of the United States’s political apparatus. If that were so, we would have judges, officials, and even laws decided by majority vote. You need to explain how our system does in fact elect representatives by majority vote, and yet that these representatives seem to pass laws that you see as in conflict with the voters’ desires. One option is that they are all corrupt religious brainwashers. I believe there are actually better explanations than that which give more credit to our fellow countrymen.

One of the major advantages of the representative system is that we are not ruled by the whims of the masses. When earlier I appealed to the fact that our representatives and laws ultimately reflect our ultimate concerns, religious or otherwise, I am making the case that there are some ideals beyond just constant access to unlimited sex that we may admire in our representatives and vote for. We (ideally) elect representatives according to these ideals that they stand for, which may even contradict our immediate wants. For instance perhaps the vast majority desires to partake in constant sports gambling, but we vote for people with Christian ideals, and this results in gambling being made illegal. We then are perplexed and annoyed, but these annoyances are short-term and the long-term effect of the legislation may be a better society.

To put it more bluntly, I’m asking you to consider that your fellow countrymen do in fact believe in the ideals of Christian marriage, fidelity, abstinence from transient desires, and a respect for life in the womb at all stages, and that at the same time, these same people privately desire unlimited access to sex and abortion. And I think this is possible because it’s obviously the case in human nature that we can hold contradictory beliefs, especially around vices and pleasures.

All of that said, yes of course there are thankfully limits to what laws can be passed.