Today is a historic day in the United States of America. The Supreme Court will hear opening arguments on California's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriages. Certain elements of the Republican Party are painting the debate as a “Gay rights” issue or “States’ rights” issue. But it is neither – and to make either case is a morally bankrupt argument.
Because this is really an attempt to discriminate against a segment of the population, which is anti-humanity, and thus anti-prosperity.
Let’s leave the demagogue politics aside, and look at the issue from the principles of prosperity. Doing so dispels both the Gay rights and States' rights questions.
First, we must begin by understanding there is no such thing as “Gay rights” or “States’ rights” – only human rights. Gays are not seeking any special rights to be conferred upon them. They are demanding the same fair and equal treatment anyone else receives under the law. There are serious consequences regarding taxes, inheritance, child support, and medical consent and visitation that impact unmarried couples dramatically differently than married ones. A government of the people cannot condone the discrimination of any element of its citizenry.
No rational, compassionate person would condone a ban on marriage for Jews, Eskimos or blond people. And no rational, compassionate person can condone a ban on someone because of their sexual orientation. Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender people are humans too. And all humans deserve the same rights and protection of their government as everyone else in their country. Prosperity consciousness could accept nothing less.
Now let’s look at the “States’ rights” issue. Only individuals have rights, States have powers. Rights are natural, powers are granted and limited. I’m a Constitutionalist and a Libertarian, so I strongly support keeping State sovereignty sacrosanct. But you can’t allow any State to select and discriminate against a segment of its citizens, because that would violate the Bill of Rights.
Gary Bauer, president of the ludicrously named “American Values,” said on Fox News Sunday that proponents of same sex marriage are effectively asking "for unelected judges to deny the people of the States the right to decide what marriage is in their state." That’s pretty much the same argument the Confederate States made about keeping slavery. States do not have the power to subjugate or discriminate against segments of society – even if they hold a referendum on it. That is what the Bill of Rights is there for.
Now if you want to make the argument that marriage is a religious institution, I have no problem with that. But no rational, compassionate person could suggest that their religious doctrines and dogma should be law for everyone else. (And yes I am well aware there are many countries where this is the case. But these are not rational, compassionate people. They are crazed zealots who persecute and kill their own people in the name of sky God superstitions.)
There are those who argue that same sex marriage is against their moral and religious beliefs. The key word there is “their.” The answer is pretty simple really: If you are morally against same-sex marriage - just don’t marry someone of the same sex!
Most religions are perpetuating lack and limitation doctrines like this, as evidenced by the Muslim and Catholic second class treatment of women, and people of other faiths. I defend any religion’s right to set their own doctrines. But any enlightened person with prosperity conscious would not be a party to that, and would not let their government legislate this.
From a prosperity standpoint, it would be best if governments only recognized civil unions for everybody – same sex or opposite sex – and left “marriage” to be defined however individual religions want to define it. People have a choice to follow a religion or not. They don’t have a choice what country they are born in. And any prosperous country would never try to discriminate against any segment of its own society.
I realize this is not a popular opinion. A Fox News poll released last week showed only 49 percent in favor of same sex marriage, and 46 percent of the population still opposed to it. But polling is irrelevant in an issue of this magnitude.
At one time in our history, it was illegal to marry someone of another race. Today, most rational, compassionate people would find such a law abhorrent. What was accepted as “appropriate” years ago has now changed so much that to even suggest such a law prohibiting who can marry whom because of race, would be dismissed quickly.
In fifty years, people will look back at the historical significance of this week. And your grandchildren will be shocked to learn that it once was acceptable to discriminate against someone because of who they loved or were attracted to.
Any person who lives by the principles of prosperity must stand for the rights of all humans to live with liberty, in pursuit of their own prosperity and happiness. This is a principle of prosperity.