LGBT’s are people too, right?

Posted on May 6, 2010 by


LONG BEACH, CA - MAY 18:  Long Beach 1st Counc...
Image by Getty Images via Daylife

In my continuing discussion of the Libertarian Party platform, today I will be discussing section 1.3, Personal Relationships.  The views expressed in this blog are my own, and should not be taken as official Libertarian Party views.

“1.3    Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.”

Government needs to get out of our lives.  That is one of the ‘battle’ cries of Libertarians. As such, the personal relationships plank of the Libertarian Party Platform makes perfect sense.  Why should government have the right to tell people they can’t get married because of their sexual preference?  Isn’t that kind of like the government telling people they can’t get married because of the color of their skin?  And if you are going to make the argument to me that the bible says being gay is a sin, I’m calling shenanigans.  The bible says ALL of us are sinners, wasn’t that point of Jesus, to save all the sinners?  So are you saying your sin isn’t as bad as their sin, even though the bible says “Judge not, least ye be judged?”  But I digress…

Libertarians believe that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights apply to all Americans, not just straight Americans.  What right does the government have to tell a gay man or woman they can not adopt a child?  Just because they are gay means they can’t be a great parent?  And then there is ‘Don’t ask, Don’t tell.”  We are at a point in American history where if ANYONE wants to serve in the military, they should be allowed.  There are experienced, high-ranking military members that have been kicked out of the military because they were gay.  These were the people who have been there, seen the hell, and still wanted to stay in!  And yet, because they weren’t straight Americans, they were kicked out, even though they were the experienced, highly trained soldiers.

The next section is similar to the first, but with one clear distinction.  This section says ANY consenting adults should be free to choose their relationships.  Gay men and women are certainly part of this again, but so are straight people.  How, you ask?  There are straight sexual relationships that are illegal in America as well?  Yes, and it is centered around Prostitution.  This reverts back to the Individual Freedom clause.  If a man or a woman wishes to make an income, especially in this economy, by selling sex, why should they be denied that right?  “But what about disease? And what about destroying families?”  There are parts of Arizona where prostitution is legal, and I would say that in order to be ‘consumer friendly’, it is in their best interests to stay clean.  As far as destroying families, if a married man wants to have sex with someone other than his wife, he will, regardless of whether prostitution is legal or not.

The last section again illustrates the Libertarian viewpoint of government: it has no right to define our relationships, license those relationships, or restrict those relationships.  There are only two real reasons that government does any of these things: to make money, and to enforce someone elses morals on people.  And I, for one, would feel much safer as an American if I know that I get to choose my own morals, as long as I don’t encroach on someone elses rights.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]