Did the Irish save European civilization?

A few weeks ago, I met someone who worked for the European branch of the American Center for Law and Justice (Pat Robertson's answer to the ACLU). We chatted about his work, and he discussed his latest project, which, in a nutshell, amounted to the subversion of the European Union.

Dum. Dum. Dum.

The issue in question involved the Treaty of Lisbon, which was rejected last week by the Irish people. The Treaty, what the New York Times called "a painstakingly negotiated blueprint for consolidating the European Union’s power and streamlining its increasingly unwieldy bureaucracy," was supposed to reform and solidify the governance of Europe. But for more conservatively minded folks, the Treaty's streamlining procedures also meant that member states would give up much of their control over legislation and regulations in the areas of health care and family life. (In other words, states would no longer be able to regulate abortion and gay marriage.)

The ECLJ brief details the concerns.

But while people may disagree with the ECLJ over the controversial moral issues involved, the serious questions about the approval process that they raise are significant. The major problem with the Treaty is that it amounts to a back-door approval of a European governing system without the democratic consent of the people. Ireland, because of its constitution, was the only member state of the European Union that actually voted on it. The 18 member states that already approved the Treaty did so through more diplomatic (that is, closed) means.

Of course, one can see the Lisbon Treaty as a procedural issue, something that ordinary people wouldn't care to understand or be bothered with. But is that any way to begin a government?