Every time a libertarian mentions the government should get out of marriage
We know! Just like the government *should* end the Fed and *should* spend within its means. But it’s probably not going to happen, so….now what?
I’m not supporting any protest except those against governments. I think the LGBT community has a good opportunity to fight in the opposite direction, because so many people stand with them. Instead, they’re being disappointing and demanding more government intervention. How awesome would it be if instead everyone started to demand that the government stop granting special privileges to married people, and stopped taking rights away from single people?
I don’t care how pissed people get, I’m not hopping on board the marriage equality movement, or anything that asks the government to do more than they are. If you any other libertarians or whatever want to, that’s your prerogative, and I do not care, but I won’t be guilted into joining something I don’t believe in. Government should not nor ever determine which people are allowed to associate. If the LGBT community really wants me on board, that’s what they’ll fight for.
^^ What he said.
Ideologically I 100 percent agree with you.
Pragmatically this is where I diverge into minarchism to help people acheive liberty in my current lifetime by taking gradual steps.
The State is actively prohibiting private voluntary marriage contracts of certain individuals. To say the state should simply get out right now at this juncture in history is a facile one when these and any contracts’ validity are completely at the whims of the laws and courts of the State.
Call me not a RealLibertarian if you want but I’ll take gradualism when I can get it.
Nerdy, I’m an anarchist and I believe that we can use the power of voting to abolish parts of the state, but I got to agree with BYU here.
The LGBT movement can absolutely get the backing of the people if they came out and said “we want to abolish government control of marriage and licensing”.
Instead what they are asking for is for more government control and power. They want government to be in charge of allowing them to participate in a relationship.
This is the opposite of freedom and liberty and I’m afraid that the LGBT movement just doesn’t see it, sadly.
It would be such a sweet victory for everyone (except states and statists). LGBT people would earn back their right to do what they want and the liberty/freedom movement would abolish 0.0000000001% of government’s power.
unfortunately, both sides are just arguing over who gets to use the government to coerce others and decide how gov’t uses their power over people.
When even Supreme Court justices (Alito among others) talk about the 2000 years of “traditional marriage,” I want to know which “traditional” marriage they are talking about? The one with coverture or without? The one with concubines or without? The one that wasn’t allowed across race or not? The one where the husband could legally rape his wife or not? The one with the wives at home or the ones where they work in the market? Seriously. There’s no such thing as “traditional” marriage. The institution, like all others, has evolved as other social factors have changed.
Our vision of the 1950s family is not “traditional.” It was a brief blip in the long evolution of marriage as an institution. …— Steve Horwitz
The Fight For Equal Rights Leads To Unequal Power
Everyone wants one of two things: They either want gov’t to “grant” them the right to get married or to ban their right to get married.
Everyone is forgetting the third, and in my opinion, the only option. Who the fuck cares what gov’t has to say? The gov’t doesn’t deserve and should possess the power to tell people who they can marry and what they can and can’t do.
The real irony of the whole situation is that while people on either side of the debate are fighting for equality or protection what they are really doing is granting power to a small group of individuals, whether that be the government as a whole or the supreme court, the power to dictate and coerce people.
They are essentially creating an inequality and granting power, setting themselves up for future persecution. It’s like being lost in the woods and handing a criminal a loaded gun with the hopes that they might use that gun to help you this one time and not use it to hurt you shortly there after.
This isn’t a cop out but I’m not taking either side here, I don’t think there should be a side to take. Actually, I am. I believe that gay people should be able to get married and adopt and have happy lives and do whatever makes them smile. I also think that idiots should have the right to be idiots and be homophobic because they aren’t smart enough or logical enough to understand liberty and freedom, just don’t try and force anyone else to agree with you.
Both sides can have exactly what they want. I just think that no one is going about this the right way. They are doing it by granting power and authority over themselves and their fellow man to a tiny minority of people.
Really silly logic if you ask me.
Real equality is not giving a small group of people the right to tell others who they can marry.
I’m a little proud of you tonight, America. Just a little, but I’m proud.
A couple of big wins for humans tonight: #1. Same-Sex Marriage is being legalized in a lot of states and #2. Marijuana use is being legalized in a couple of states. #3. New Hampshire just abolished their state income tax. I’m a little proud, America. Just a little.
We still need to get our shit together on a Congressional and Federal level.