Right on the Nail–Prop 8 is not discrimination

I think Thomas Sowell (a black man) hits this issue right on the nail:

 “The argument that current marriage laws “discriminate” against homosexuals confuses discrimination against people with making distinctions among different kinds of behavior. ”

“Marriage has existed for centuries and, until recent times, it has always meant a union between a man and a woman. Over those centuries, a vast array of laws has grown up, all based on circumstances that arise in unions between a man and a woman.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that law has not been based on logic but on experience. To apply a mountain of laws based specifically on experience with relations between a man and a woman to a different relationship where sex differences are not involved would be like applying the rules of baseball to football.”

“While people may be treated the same, all their behaviors are not. Laws that forbid bicycles from being ridden on freeways obviously have a different effect on people who have bicycles but no cars. But this is not discrimination against a person. The cyclist who gets into a car is just as free to drive on the freeway as anybody else. ”

 “The question is not whether gays should be permitted to marry…The real issue is whether marriage should be redefined.”

“Despite heavy television advertising in California for “gay marriage,” showing blacks being set upon by police dogs during civil right marches, and implying that homosexuals face the same discrimination today, the analogy is completely false.

Blacks had to sit in the back of the bus because they were black. They were doing exactly what white people were doing— riding a bus. That is what made it racial discrimination. ”

“Marriage is not a right but a set of legal obligations imposed because the government has a vested interest in unions that, among other things, have the potential to produce children, which is to say, the future population of the nation.”

“Gays were on their strongest ground when they said that what they did was nobody else’s business. Now they are asserting a right to other people’s approval, which is wholly different.

None of us has a right to other people’s approval.”

You can read the article in full here.

Advertisements

8 Responses

  1. Bigot.

  2. What a great example of the immaturity and intolerance of select people against prop 8 who have the inability to discuss the issue and resort to name-calling. For more examples of name-calling, destruction of personal property, and acts of hate, please see my other post: What is tolerance?

  3. Love this post! You’re right on. No one ever seems to mention that first cousins can’t marry, siblings and other relatives can’t marry., none of them are getting irate over marriage. Marriage isn’t a right. It’s a privilege for one man and one woman. It also stumps me how gay activists try to play the “race” card. What race is this exactly? I talk about this in my blog post.

    ~Journalista
    http://thejournalistachronicle.wordpress.com/2008/11/13/blogger-editoral-wowlooks-like-the-opposition-is-getting-a-little-fired-up-at-my-blog/

  4. “Marriage is not a right but a set of legal obligations imposed because the government has a vested interest in unions that, among other things, have the potential to produce children, which is to say, the future population of the nation.”

    So couples who adopt or foster children, or who have children by donor, shouldn’t be allowed to get married, because according to you, the government has no vested interest in supporting unions that only bring children up in families with loving parents?

    Just having children doesn’t require marriage. For bringing children up, though, two parents are pretty good, and the notion that mixed-sex couples deserve marriage when they bring up children together, but same-sex couples somehow don’t, just seems …well, like unthinking bigotry to me.

    It’s not about “approval”. It’s about civil rights.

  5. Thanks for the reply. Let me clarify. The point here is that the government has an interest in protecting unions that have the potential to produce functional members of society whether or not the children are biological or adopted.

  6. Also, just noticed your last comment about this debate being about civil rights instead of approval.

    Let me just say that my view is marriage is not a civil right, it is a definition. and the current, most accepted definition is the union between a man and a woman. This debate is about changing that definition, and along with changing it, validating that all unions are the same, when in fact, they’re not.

    Like this author states in my post above, “To apply a mountain of laws based specifically on experience with relations between a man and a woman to a different relationship where sex differences are not involved would be like applying the rules of baseball to football.”

  7. “Gays were on their strongest ground when they said that what they did was nobody else’s business. Now they are asserting a right to other people’s approval, which is wholly different. None of us has a right to other people’s approval.”

    Exactly right! not only are they demanding inclusion, but they’re demanding what amounts to replacement, as one set of values makes way for another.

    http://beetlebabee.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/its-not-about-inclusion/

  8. The point here is that the government has an interest in protecting unions that have the potential to produce functional members of society whether or not the children are biological or adopted.

    Precisely. So the government has an interest in protecting both mixed-sex and same-sex unions equally, and that means – of course – supporting the freedom to marry for same-sex couples.

    You could of course set an equal barrier for all, that no couple could marry unless they had a definite committment to have children, but I think you’d find a lot of mixed-sex couples would object to having their childfree marriages dissolved against their will…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: