"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to separation" (Jefferson, Franklin, Sherman, Adams, Livingston, 1776). The basic morals of a strong democracy is equal rights and freedom of speech. You can't have a "democracy" if these morals aren't shown through the representative(s) of that democracy. More than likely, if those two characteristics aren't heart-felt by the citizens of that democracy, there's a strong possibility of the people being outraged. When the people get outraged, there's a great chance of the citizens of that democracy going against the representatives to get what they want.
Anytime there is a civil rights issue, the main point of that issue is, the people feel as if there is a something that is unfair. Historically, in the past of well-known democracy issues with civil rights, the main point was because of certain individuals felt as if something was unfair. This is hug because representatives of democracies try to make sure that the people they're representing are happy. Any democracies are heavily based on a religious belief of treating others as if you would want to be treated. No matter what religion, if it's a democracy, it's for surely to be based on the equal rights of others. For example: In Islam, The Muslims who believe in the Quran believe in the statement taken from the Quran: "Immutable principles of justice, truth, and equality". Once again heavily stating that the right thing to do is to be equal to people because it's the right thing to do.
On the other hand, many democracies representatives wouldn't know if their people had a problem if the people didn't speak or propose the problem to them.
