Conservatives and libertarians in adversarial positions.
Keep in mind a state "mandate" may be found to violate federal law (as this was a supreme court ruling) and the "will of the people" will be damned even if it were unanimous.
"whatever consenting adults want to do is their business, and government should stay out of it."
I think you miss a point here. Marriage is not a matter of consenting adults. What! How can I say this? Marriage involves everyone else since married couples get all sorts of tax breaks and other economic advantages. Inevitably, the costs are passed on to other (single) people.
A point which has been made in the various websites devoted to the marriage strike is that when you get married, you are creating a contract with the government. Effectively, you promise the state that you will remain married. If you do not, the state then has every right to deprive you of your liberties and properties via child support, alimony, and the enforced supervision of "family" courts. Some contract!
The libertarian position would make sense if the state were not involved in marriage. Of course, there is nothing to stop homosexual couples now from forming whatever kind of union they like between themselves via contract. They just can not get the state's stamp of approval.
Californian, I agree with you.
My words about 'whatever consenting adults want to do" was a quote from those who support gay marriage or whatever; those were not my sentiments.
The libertarian position (which many 'conservatives' now hold as well) is that the state should get out of the marriage business and let people do what they will without legal impediment to whatever arrangement they prefer.
I agree, homosexuals are perfectly free to have 'de facto' marriages as they do now, wherein they can draw up legal agreements about property, etc. And they are also allowed to get insurance for their 'partners', etc., without the benefit of marriage. I truly think the obsession with getting married is that then they will have prevailed, and made the rest of us agree that their lifestyle and predilections are valid and fully equal to traditional marriage.
It's a power and control thing; they want to diminish the role of traditional marriage and family.
-VA
I think we would find many agree on the libertarian frame of mind specific to marriage. My PC-washed version of a similar article/commentary:
Supreme Court says "Gay is OK".
>
I say NO CIVIL MARRIAGE - hetero or homo (or interspecies).
>
We have lawyers and a judicial system to bind us under and protect our personal decisions. We don't need a "title" like spouse to determine our will.
> Leave the sacrament of matrimony to the religious. Heck, it would probably fill some pews.
Unfortunately I think we live in an era when the predominant thinking is that any sort of tradition or cultural norm is simply a stuffy, useless piece of old superstition that has no actual importance other than to make some old people feel safe. The predominant thought is that everyone can just do whatever they want, and as long as you agree to let other people do whatever they want, and they let you do whatever you want, then we'll all be fine and free and happy and peaceful. The crux of it seems to be a belief that there are no real ethnic or gender differences that matter and that there are no social traditions or national identities that really matter.
That's the general idea that our society has adopted. Young people I think have generally always thought at least a little that way, but even more so nowadays. I think that, unfortunately, what we're going to have to relearn the hard way is that there are ethnic and gender and cultural differences that matter, and that it does matter whether homosexuals are treated as though their behavior was no different than heterosexual behavior. People just aren't going to believe it until they see how bad things get when those realities are ignored.
It's depressing to watch our civilization self-destruct like this when we really had it all, so to speak. We had tremendous economic prosperity, unrivaled security from military attack, we were the leading innovators of all of history...and then this sickness stole over us, this leftist/egalitarian/libertarian sickness that is stealing away our prosperity and security and technical advantages right at our peak, handing it off to alien peoples or just destroying it outright in a fit of idealistic foolishness.
flippityfloppity - I agree that the ideas which most people express are libertarian in origin. My next blog entry is mostly about that.
If we leave marriage only to the religious, that will mean most people will not have a way to get married, since many are unchurched or outright unbelievers. Would we still allow the phony mail-order minister type weddings, where the 'minister' is a minister of nothing in particular? I think if every cult or religion could conduct weddings without any legal restrictions, it would be chaos.
-VA
Mark - I think you are exactly right.
There is this near-universal idea that if we all just give each other the right to do as we please, then we can all be happy, as you say. And that includes even tolerating each others' wrongdoing -- as long as it does not involve a wrong to us personally, most of us will look the other way, and claim it's none of our business. It's a kind of Faustian bargain. Give each other license and we can be guaranteed of the same permission for ourselves to behave badly or anti-socially.
I wonder why we are on this self-destructive course? I mean, I know all the obvious explanations, but why are we as a generation suddenly refusing to learn from the past, and determined to overturn everything and re-invent the world according to some untested and untried ideas, or according to ideas that are proven disastrous? I don't get it.
-VA
There is this near-universal idea that if we all just give each other the right to do as we please, then we can all be happy, as you say.
Actually, the only people who have a right to do as they please these days are those groups with the liberal/PC stamp of approval. Please note that if you tried to start up a white pride group on campus you would not see the light of day again!
I wonder why we are on this self-destructive course? I mean, I know all the obvious explanations, but why are we as a generation suddenly refusing to learn from the past, and determined to overturn everything and re-invent the world according to some untested and untried ideas, or according to ideas that are proven disastrous? I don't get it.
I'll state the obvious point, that this is a revolutionary agenda promoted by the PC left. It works for the same reason that Marxism worked as a radical movement for most of the 20th century: superior organization, superior propaganda, superior repression, and as usual, the other side was generally clueless.
The collapse of Marxism came about in large part because it proved unworkable in the real world -- see the USSR. I suspect the US/West will have to learn the hard way about PC. As we are learning now with the collapse of the borders and the decline in the birth rates.
The biggest problem is not the homosexuals or the immigrants -- all of whom are symptoms -- but the treason of the West's elites, from the campuses to the government offices.
Californian - I get your point about the elites, but I still blame the gate-crashers, border-hoppers, and various opportunists who are taking advantage of our kindness. I used to be a very tender-hearted person but my sympathy has been used up.
It's just as I said before: suppose my local law enforcement officers or city fathers refuse to enforce laws protecting me or my property. Yes, they are culpable and derelict and should be impeached or fired or run out of town on a rail. But does that absolve burglars or thieves or home invaders of their guilt and culpability? No, no way. They are not innocents. They are just as guilty as the people in authority. People who commit crimes are never blameless, even if people in authority are also guilty.
And I have a huge problem with always blaming our own and ourselves. while making excuses for outsiders. That's the opposite of the natural order of things.
-VA
Commenting by HaloScan
