Banter on The Banter – Gay Marriage Debate
By Ben Cohen
A reader writes in response to my post on Rick Warren:
I know I'm inviting trolling of all sorts but here's my opinion:
Those who are against Prop8 usually press the necessity of tolerance.
Even if it goes against your point of view and is a complicated
oxy-moron, why can they not be tolerant that there are other people in
their society that do not feel that a man-man union or a woman-woman
union is right and, perhaps, an outright abomination? They must
understand that those who support Prop8 feel same sex unions jeopardize
society by going against an order they believe God created. You don't
need to agree with them, but why can't you be tolerant of the fact that
they have an opinion, albeit an opposing one? Or is tolerance a one-way
thing?
I believe this is a specious argument based on a false premise. It's like saying you if you don't like interracial marriage, those views must be tolerated too. If we accept homosexuality as being a natural part of being human
(which scientifically, it clearly is), then gay marriage is perfectly
legitimate. If we deny gays the right to marry based on religious text (which is not scientific), then we must also ban things like having mildew in your house. Denying gays the right to marry is prejudice, and not based on anything remotely provable. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you have to enforce your views on the rest of the population, even if you are in the majority. That's why the constitution was set up to protect the rights of minorities in the face of the tyranny of the majority.
By Ben Cohen
A reader writes in response to my post on Rick Warren:
Those who are against Prop8 usually press the necessity of tolerance.
Even if it goes against your point of view and is a complicated
oxy-moron, why can they not be tolerant that there are other people in
their society that do not feel that a man-man union or a woman-woman
union is right and, perhaps, an outright abomination? They must
understand that those who support Prop8 feel same sex unions jeopardize
society by going against an order they believe God created. You don't
need to agree with them, but why can't you be tolerant of the fact that
they have an opinion, albeit an opposing one? Or is tolerance a one-way
thing?
I believe this is a specious argument based on a false premise. It's like saying you if you don't like interracial marriage, those views must be tolerated too. If we accept homosexuality as being a natural part of being human
(which scientifically, it clearly is), then gay marriage is perfectly
legitimate. If we deny gays the right to marry based on religious text (which is not scientific), then we must also ban things like having mildew in your house. Denying gays the right to marry is prejudice, and not based on anything remotely provable. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you have to enforce your views on the rest of the population, even if you are in the majority. That's why the constitution was set up to protect the rights of minorities in the face of the tyranny of the majority.
Of course, your argument, Cohen, springs from a false (in my opinion) assumption: that the government has a right to license marriage.
As a libertarian, I think there are many functions the government should not be involved in. But even collectivists, (and, based on your articles, I would place you relatively far toward the collectivist side of the collectivist/individualist continuum) would have to agree that supporting licensing of marriage by government clearly violates church/state constricts of the constitution.
What’s next? Perhaps the state should license baptism, confirmation, and bar mitzvahs.
A simple resolution to the gay marriage debate is for the government to get out of the business of licensing marriage. A legitimate role of government is to enforce contracts. Domestic partnership contracts are readily enforceable. Thus, parent/child and other potentially thorny issues that fall within current case and statutory law can be handled the same way they are handled now.
A key question is which side of the gay marriage issue, anti or pro, will support getting government out of the business of licensing marriage? The answer will say a lot about the true goals of each side.