Reasonandjest.com Columns With Reason and Cartoons In Jest | | |
Home Cartoons Columns Books Blog Contact About
Separation of Marriage and State
by
Scott Lazarowitz
June 2009
Recently
the California State Supreme Court upheld a referendum to ban same-sex
marriage, and New Hampshire's governor signed a bill into law
legalizing it. I'm so tired of hearing about "same-sex marriage" or
"gay marriage," and every time a talk show is discussing it I change
the station. First, why are we still debating this issue in the 21st
Century? And what business is it of the state who is married and who
isn't? And who is the state to allow or forbid any kind of private
relationship or contract? One would think that conservatives would want
homosexuals to be in a monogamous commitment, rather than living a
promiscuous, multi-partner lifestyle. I personally favor traditional
marriage, but there should be no laws addressing the issue altogether.
The
Declaration of Independence states that, among our natural Rights are
the "Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." And that
implies that an individual's pursuit of happiness may not include any
violation of any other individual's life, liberty or property.
People have a right to be involved in a marriage, whether or not
it's in line with society's common description of "marriage," as
long as they don't violate anyone else's life, liberty or property.
I'm
no expert on contract law, but a marriage contract is a contract, and
people have a right to establish voluntary contracts, with the terms of
those contracts being the private business of those involved, and it's
really no one else's business. People's private contracts certainly are
none of their neighbors' business, so they ought not be any of the
state's business. Who is the state to determine which contracts are
valid and which aren't, based on some arbitrary rules that have nothing
to do with the protection of life, liberty and property? If a party in
a contract has some dispute with another, or wants to sue for "breach
of contract," then the state gets involved to help settle the
disagreement or suit.
Some people are just so worried
that same-sex marriages will lead to some kind of "degradation of
society." Well, what do you think we have now, for crying out loud? Our
society has degraded not because of homosexuals being married, but
because of many other factors, including the ever-increasing dependence
on government to do things it has no business doing, the
ever-increasing intrusion of government into our private lives in
general, and the influence of the sickos of pop culture on our society.
Other factors of societal degradation include bad parenting, and
allowing people to get away with actual crimes, such as
child-molesters, tax-cheating Treasury Secretaries and the incestuously
extortionist relationship between Big Business and Big Government. The
moralists should stick with these problems of actual immorality.
And
some people are worried that allowing same-sex marriage will
"negatively affect our population growth." Just what percentage of the
population are homosexual, anyway? Various sources on the Internet give
figures ranging from 2-15%. I'll go with roughly 10%. And what
percentage of that are in actual homosexual relationships? And what
percentage of that are in long-term relationships who actually want to
be married? It can't be that much. If you're worried about the
society's future, then enacting laws banning same-sex marriage to
promote opposite-sex marriage for "population growth" would then be in
the category of "social engineering."
Conservatives usually
speak of the "right to be left alone," and believe in "small
government," and are critical of the Left for using the state for
forced social engineering. If traditional marriage really needs
to be protected, then let our cultural institutions such as churches
and families, and other social organizations promote it. And let people
in the "bully pulpit" such as Rush Limbaugh or Phyllis Schlafly
be vocal advocates of traditional, opposite-sex marriage, but don't use
the armed force of government to ban same-sex marriage. Laws should
exist to protect people and property, not to engage in social
engineering or society planning.
Copyright.2009.Reasonandjest.com