A Word On Same-Sex Marriage

This post may be somewhat controversial. That’s all the disclaimer you get.

As a Libertarian and a social conservative, I support same-sex marriage. Bet you didn’t see that coming. Let me explain that.

To begin with, I don’t believe anybody’s marriage is the government’s business. I don’t believe that government, at any level, has any business giving special perks to married people, regardless of the composition of the couple. Straight, gay, interracial, Martian, whatever. I don’t believe that married people should get government-sanctioned perks that single people don’t get.

But since they do, the socially conservative fall-back position — for me, anyway — is that the government shouldn’t get to say who can get married and who can’t.

It shouldn’t be any of their business, nor anybody else’s business.

The only time any governmental body, at any level, should have anything to say about any marriage is where there is clearly a non-consensual element. That isn’t happening with gay marriages, so it should be nobody’s business but the couple’s.

There you have it.

One comment

  • Your post here on the logic of not banning consensual adult behavior such as same-sex marriage, plus your later posts in your wordforge forum on, “Is it time for us to adopt the teachings of Surak? Or the real-world equivalent? (The world is a violent place, full of villains and ne’er-do-wells. Is it time that human beings, as a species, adopted Stoicism as a way of life to counteract the pandemic of violence?),” suggests you may be interested in checking out “pluralistic rationalism” and the first international society espousing it, The Circle of Reason. You can look either up on Wikipedia or at http://www.circleofreason.org. In its “About Us” section, COR describes what’s different vs. similar about the pluralistic (methodological) rationalism social movement and that of Stoicism or fictive “Vulcan logic plus IDIC.” The Wikipedia article may also indicate the difference between Pluralistic Rationalism and Objectivism — the former is methodological, espousing no required adherence to potentially arbitrary worldviews. Pluralistic rationalists thus believe that all of us, theist or atheist, conservative or liberal, share the human capacity to use reason — or to abandon it.
    Regards,
    Frank Burton

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s