Thomas Sowell on gay marriage:
Of all the phony arguments for gay marriage, the phoniest is the argument that it is a matter of equal rights. Marriage is not a right extended to individuals by the government. It is a restriction on the rights they already have.
It’s a compelling argument. He says that any two people in society can decide to enter into property and personal agreements if they wish and allows them to order those agreements in almost any manner. What marriage law does is restrict the possible arrangements. If a wife buys an automobile, her husband automatically has rights to half of it in most circumstances. That is a restriction on the wife’s rights, for good or for ill. Society asserts its authority to impose such restrictions because of the importance of family and the rearing of children to society.
It makes no sense for homosexuals to seek as a right to impose those restrictions on themselves when they have the right to enter into any kind of property or life agreement with any person they wish. Sowell asks and answers the question: So why do they bother? Because they seek official social approval of their lifestyle. Then he explains why this is the antithesis of equal rights.
If you have a right to someone else’s approval, then they do not have a right to their own opinions and values. You cannot say that what “consenting adults” do in private is nobody else’s business and then turn around and say that others are bound to put their seal of approval on it.
He’s right on the money.
“If a wife buys an automobile, her husband automatically has rights to half of it in most circumstances.”
Hmmm … I thought that, with regards to property rights between a husband and wife, it was always what’s mine is hers and what’s hers is hers.
Dan, that’s only if you get divorced, and her lawyer can kick your lawyer’s… you get the point.