Gay Marriage
I am not personally opposed to gay marriage. It seems pointless to forbid such a thing, but I do have some comments for those who are enthusiastic about it.
1. Regarding the recent California Supreme Court decision : They can't declare a part of the constitution to be unconstitutional. It is their job to interpret the constitution as it applies to certain legislation or litigation. They can't decide to ignore a part of the constitution, any more than your cable guy can decide not to install the Disney channel because he hates mice. Not their job!
2. Single people are also subject to much of the same discrimination as gays who are not allowed to marry. If gays receive no medical, pension etc. benefits then single people don't get those either. Why should a married person whether gay or not, get more benefits (really money) for the same job? If you buy a newspaper on the street do you give the guy an extra dime if he claims to be married?
3. As for such access issues as hospital visitation or health proxy. These also discriminate against single people if enforced. If a single person cannot specify a friend of either sex for such a role, then that is also discrimination. A single person might prefer to have a friend of the same religion (or non-religion) to make a health care decision in an emergency. Why should they have to be married to do so?
In short gay marriage is really a red herring from a libertarian POV. Unequal rights for married people versus single people is the real discrimination.
1. Regarding the recent California Supreme Court decision : They can't declare a part of the constitution to be unconstitutional. It is their job to interpret the constitution as it applies to certain legislation or litigation. They can't decide to ignore a part of the constitution, any more than your cable guy can decide not to install the Disney channel because he hates mice. Not their job!
2. Single people are also subject to much of the same discrimination as gays who are not allowed to marry. If gays receive no medical, pension etc. benefits then single people don't get those either. Why should a married person whether gay or not, get more benefits (really money) for the same job? If you buy a newspaper on the street do you give the guy an extra dime if he claims to be married?
3. As for such access issues as hospital visitation or health proxy. These also discriminate against single people if enforced. If a single person cannot specify a friend of either sex for such a role, then that is also discrimination. A single person might prefer to have a friend of the same religion (or non-religion) to make a health care decision in an emergency. Why should they have to be married to do so?
In short gay marriage is really a red herring from a libertarian POV. Unequal rights for married people versus single people is the real discrimination.