Skip to content

Separation of Marriage and State

June 2009

Recently the California State Supreme Court upheld a referendum to ban same-sex marriage, and New Hampshire’s governor signed a bill into law legalizing it. I’m so tired of hearing about “same-sex marriage” or “gay marriage,” and every time a talk show is discussing it I change the station. First, why are we still debating this issue in the 21st Century? And what business is it of the state who is married and who isn’t? And who is the state to allow or forbid any kind of private relationship or contract? One would think that conservatives would want homosexuals to be in a monogamous commitment, rather than living a promiscuous, multi-partner lifestyle. I personally favor traditional marriage, but there should be no laws addressing the issue altogether.

The Declaration of Independence states that, among our natural Rights are the “Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” And that implies that an individual’s pursuit of happiness may not include any violation of any other individual’s life, liberty or property.  People have a  right to be involved in a marriage, whether or not it’s in line with  society’s common description of “marriage,” as long as they don’t violate anyone else’s life, liberty or property.

I’m no expert on contract law, but a marriage contract is a contract, and people have a right to establish voluntary contracts, with the terms of those contracts being the private business of those involved, and it’s really no one else’s business. People’s private contracts certainly are none of their neighbors’ business, so they ought not be any of the state’s business. Who is the state to determine which contracts are valid and which aren’t, based on some arbitrary rules that have nothing to do with the protection of life, liberty and property? If a party in a contract has some dispute with another, or wants to sue for “breach of contract,” then the state gets involved to help settle the disagreement or suit.

Some people are just so worried that same-sex marriages will lead to some kind of “degradation of society.” Well, what do you think we have now, for crying out loud? Our society has degraded not because of homosexuals being married, but because of many other factors, including the ever-increasing dependence on government to do things it has no business doing, the ever-increasing intrusion of government into our private lives in general, and the influence of the sickos of pop culture on our society. Other factors of societal degradation include bad parenting, and allowing people to get away with actual crimes, such as child-molesters, tax-cheating Treasury Secretaries and the incestuously extortionist relationship between Big Business and Big Government. The moralists should stick with these problems of actual immorality.

And some people are worried that allowing same-sex marriage will “negatively affect our population growth.” Just what percentage of the population is homosexual, anyway? Various sources on the Internet give figures ranging from 2-15%. I’ll go with roughly 10%. And what percentage of that 10% consists of those in actual homosexual relationships? And what percentage of that is in long-term relationships who actually want to be married? It can’t be that much. If you’re worried about the society’s future, then enacting laws banning same-sex marriage to promote opposite-sex marriage for “population growth” would then be in the category of “social engineering.”

Conservatives usually speak of the “right to be left alone,” and believe in “small government,” and are critical of the Left for using the state for forced social engineering.  If traditional marriage really needs to be protected, then let our cultural institutions such as churches and families, and other social organizations promote it. And let people in the “bully pulpit” such as Rush Limbaugh or Phyllis Schlafly  be vocal advocates of traditional, opposite-sex marriage. But don’t use the armed force of government to ban same-sex marriage. Laws should exist to protect people and property, not to engage in social engineering or society planning.

Published inUncategorized