Why it is imperative to continue supporting Ron Paul despite your opinion on Gay MarriageSubmitted by Bathke on Sun, 05/13/2012 - 17:22
I would like to start by saying I am an avid Ron Paul supporter. Since I learned about him in college in 2007, I have actively promoted his ideals and campaigned on his behalf. I love the movement he has created. Rand has been on my radar for a few years now, and it is clear that he is not his father, though he is still, I believe, dedicated to limited government and peace.
This movement is coming to a crossroads. Dr. Pauls message has spread so far that it now encompasses a large group of people with very different personal views. One thing we all share, however, is the idea of personal liberty and freedom. We embrace the first amendment wholeheartedly and wish to repeal oppressive government agencies that tell us what we can and can't do. However, there is a very sharp division in our ranks. Those who support homosexual marriage, and those who do not.
It is clear what Dr. Paul's position is on this subject; The federal government shouldn't be involved AT ALL and the right to decide policy should be left up to the individual states; and even then, it is his belief STILL that the government(yes the state government) should not be involved in the marriage business because of the intrisic problems that come with government intervention. Who should be the guiding force behind whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry?
As Dr. Paul himself has said, that decision should be left up to the particular religious institution.
Now lets take it a step further. What does our favorite document, the constitution, say on the subject?
1) The 1st Amendment states; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
If marriage is a religious institution defined by biblical principles then the government has no authority to establish marriage as the only legally recognized civil union
2) The 14th Amendment states; No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
If the government is going to define marriage and thus the benefits thereof, such as tax rates, healthcare, survivor benefits, etc, then it cannot restrict those privileges to certain citizens.
So, the government is bound by the constitution to either;
1) Butt out of marriage entirely. Legally recognize the civil union of any 2 consenting adults and relegate marriage to a religious institution that individuals can enter into if they so choose. And religious groups, as is their freedom, can define marriage and restrict it to whomever they choose.
2) Keep a stake in regulating marriage, and lift the restrictions so as to not be in conflict with the 14th amendment
Now, I'll play devils advocate and agree that government still needs to be part of the marriage equation;
It is my understanding that folks have a problem with civil unions because they can be used for non-sexual or non-romantic engagements. If me and a friend are living together, why should we not get a civil union for lower taxes, health benefits, etc.?
The simple answer is that this problem exists even now, without same-sex unions. Why don't I and a female friend get together now and get married simply for the benefits? Said female friend and I could still exploit the system in the exact same way. And many do. How about when people get married just to get a green card? Or for inheritence?
Lets face it, government involved in marriage is just a bad idea all around. Leave it to the religious institutions where it belongs.
WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN is a change in the rhetoric of our movement. We, as a community, have bought into the MSM argument that we only have 2 choices; Either support government controlled marriage WITHOUT including homosexuals, or support government controlled marriage WITH homosexuals.
We are missing the third option; Ron Paul's option. The government should not be involved in marriage AT ALL. Marriage is, and should remain, a personal decision made by 2 people, and consented on by their particular faith. If you abhor homosexual marriage, don't let it in your church. Work hard to keep it out of your faith. And, in turn, if you agree with homosexual marriage, you can go to a secular church that accepts homosexuals, and tye the knot. No government intervention necessary.
Our country was founded on religious freedom. Lets keep government out of our religion.
(Sorry for the super long post, but I don't want to lose RP supporters over this issue. Feel free to ask any questions or give criticisms, and I will do my best to answer honestly and appropriately)