Why not? If the citizens in my county wish to outlaw certain types of behavior, I've got no problem with local legislatures doing so. If I disagree with the actions of my LOCAL government, I've got 3 choices: Motivate people to elect new bodies to office, Live with the policies they enact (on my behalf, whether by consent or by apathy), or Leave. Everyone else is free to choose between these same choices. There is no reason to force homogenization upon the VERY diverse citizens of this nation, in any case. If Vermont wishes to have gay marriage, then they can have it. Virginia cannot be forced to recognize Vermont's marriage licenses, in that case. (This, by the way, is the nature of a "Republic," which we are still in part.)
;) ttt
Then the citizens in your county own your property, not you. Why is this so hard for people to understand. If someone other than the property owner has a say in what "behaviors" can be done on that property, then those who make the rules own the property, not the one paying the mortgage or holding the deed.
You describe a Democratized Republic. We are a Constitutional Republic that operates based on the rule of law, not the mob rule of men's votes. In a democratic republic two wolves and a sheep can vote on the lunch menu, in a Constitutionally limited Republic they can vote, but the sheep are protected from being entrees. Some behaviors, those that do not effect other people's rights, are protected under the heading of "freedom." Otherwise even religion could be voted on and enforced or outlawed, as the case may be.