The Supreme Court decision to uphold gay marriage reveals the contradiction within the conservative ideology. The majority of conservatives have long opposed gay marriage. Presidential candidate Scott Walker called the ruling "a grave mistake."
What exactly is the contradiction in the conservative position? The very foundation of their philosophy is oppostion to big government. They, like libertarians, believe in a small, limited government. They, like libertarians, believe that he who governs least governs best; that we need to minimalize government intrusion and control in our lives.
Given those beliefs, one would think conservatives would have welcomed and supported the Supreme Court decision, instead of greeting it with anger and vitriol. Here is where libertarians and conservatives part company.
From the libertarian standpoint, supporting gay marriage was the proper decision based on one simple proposition: It is beyond the purview of government to tell consenting adults who they can and cannot marry. That is not the proper role of government in a free society. Banning gay marriage is a slippery slope. By accepting the premise that the state can decide which adults can marry, it leaves the door open for future leaders to outlaw marraige between Catholics and Lutherans, or Asians and Hispanics, or marraiges where there is a large disparity in ages. Up until the 70's, a number of states banned marriages between blacks and whites. That degree of intrusion is not what a free society is about.
Ask yourself one question: Which one of your individual rights are being denied when two gay people marry? The answer is: none.
You may be offended by the concept, but the freedom of expression, by definition, means someone may say or do something that offends you. But offending someone shouldn't be a crime. Were it a crime, then we would all have spent time behind bars, because who among us hasn't at one time or another said or did something that offended somebody somewhere at some time?
This is the time for conservatives to face this contradiction. You either believe people should be free to live their lives with minimal government interference, as long as they deny no one their individual rights; or you believe that the state should enforce laws that make it a crime to offend someone's sensibilities.
I find that offensive.
No comments:
Post a Comment