browser icon
You are using an insecure version of your web browser. Please update your browser!
Using an outdated browser makes your computer unsafe. For a safer, faster, more enjoyable user experience, please update your browser today or try a newer browser.

An Issue Where Everyone Got It Wrong

Posted by on June 29, 2015
Share via email

Since the SCOTUS ruling last week on gay marriage I have been asked numerous times to write a commentary on the subject.  I have been hesitant to do so for the last several days for the simple reason that as it turns out ALL sides happen to be wrong in their argument on this issue.  By all sides I’m referring to the anti-gay marriage crowd, the pro-gay marriage crowd, AND the Supreme Court as well. 

Let’s start with that anti-gay marriage crowd.  This group is wrong for two reasons.  First, the primary basis for their argument is centered on the “moral” aspects of allowing gay marriage.  For those that read my book you already know that I am adamantly against the idea of legislating morality.  If you want to know why, I can sum it up in two words…Sharia Law.  The reality is that I don’t want some fundamentalist nut job from ANY persuasion dictating what my own personal moral standards should be.  I prefer to keep that concept confined to the dictates of my own faith and beliefs and prefer to allow others the same privilege. 

The second reason the anti-gay marriage crowd is wrong hearkens back to something Obama said before he was elected President that he actually got right (even though he didn’t understand why).  He had stated in an interview that he saw the Constitution as a document of negative rights.  In other words it talks more about what we can’t do than what we can.  In his interview he was complaining about it being that way, but in reality it’s what our Founders had intended.  The reason is simple.  In a “free” society we should automatically assume that we are free to do whatever we want up to the point where our government specifically legislates that we can’t (usually because it violates the rights and/or safety of others).  In other words, unless something is specifically restricted by ordinance we shouldn’t need to ask permission to do it. Since there is no specific reasoning behind NOT allowing gay marriage beyond the morality argument stated above we therefore shouldn’t be attempting to restrict people from acting accordingly. 

The pro-gay marriage crowd is also wrong.  The basis of their argument has been centered on the idea that it is their “right” to marry whomever they choose.  Once again they are WRONG!  The reality is that it’s NOBODY’s “right” to marry anyone.  That’s because by technical definition marriage isn’t a right at all, but rather a state level privilege.  If this confuses you think of it as being the equivalent of obtaining of a driver’s license or a concealed carry permit (CCW).  You must meet whatever the arbitrary requirements happen to be of the issuing state and adhere to their will and whim with regard to its issuance and maintenance, PERIOD! 

That brings us to the SCOTUS ruling and why they also got it wrong.  Since marriage by technical definition isn’t a right at all it doesn’t fall under the protection of the 14th Amendment as described in the affirmative majority opinion and therefore, just as Justice Antonin Scalia rightfully pointed out in the dissenting opinion the issue should have never been allowed to be adjudicated before the Supreme Court in the first place.  Instead, it is an issue that should have been remanded back to the individual state courts in hopes that they could have each retained their own version of the Wisdom of Solomon in coming up with the correct verdict.  

By ruling as SCOTUS did on this issue they have inadvertently opened up a proverbial Pandora’s Box that ultimately will anger both Conservatives and Liberals alike.  That’s because the verdict that was handed down not only usurped the technical definition of what constitutes a “right” in lieu of a privilege, but also because they have set a precedence that in essence says once a pseudo-right has been established by one state it automatically maintains by-proxy reciprocation to ALL states, thus destroying the concept of federalist governance and eviscerating the 10th Amendment accordingly. 

Think of it this way, if these new pseudo-rights are upheld over state statute as per the recent SCOTUS ruling that means more Conservative leaning states now have to accept not only gay marriage rights of more liberal leaning states, but also things like legalized marijuana as well.  Conversely, more Liberal leaning states now have to accept such things as more open gun laws along with Right-to-Work laws as well.  There was a reason our Forefathers were smart enough to setup a federalist system instead of a singular centralized government.  It was so that each of us would be free to seek out the laws of whatever state best meets our own personal needs without sacrificing our citizenship as a whole.  By not deferring to the individual states the SCOTUS just destroyed that very notion in a single ruling and the net results are that in the long run none of us will be better off for it.

Share via email

Comments are closed.