Final answer:
Popular sovereignty is a complex concept that, while rooted in democratic principles, can have problematic applications, such as allowing the spread of slavery if supported by the majority in a territory. Fundamental human rights should not be decided by majority vote, thus showcasing the limitations of popular sovereignty.
Step-by-step explanation:
I believe that the doctrine of popular sovereignty is a nuanced concept. While it is based on the noble principle that governmental authority is derived from the consent of the governed, in practice, particularly in the historical context of the United States during the mid-19th century, it was used to address the contentious issue of slavery in new territories. Popular sovereignty allowed residents in the territories to vote on whether they would allow slavery, which provided a democratic method for decision-making. However, this power could also reinforce and spread an immoral institution if the majority supported it.
It is important to recognize that while democracy is foundational to our political system, moral issues like slavery should not be left to popular vote. Fundamental human rights should not be subject to majority rule because this leads to the oppression of a minority by a majority. In conclusion, while popular sovereignty as a political principle respects the wishes of most citizens, it is essential to temper its application with a steadfast commitment to protect individual rights and liberties.