A Point of Contention

Being a Christian Classical Liberal or what many would nowadays call, Libertarian, is a difficult road to travel on. I guess Robert Frost predicted my direction when he poetically stated, "I choose the road less traveled." It is quite the road.

Anyone who took a History class should be familiar with Patrick Henry's famous and timeless quote, "Give me Liberty or give me death!" This is a personal vow I have made. I would rather die than to have my essential liberties rescinded by the stroke of a cold, calculated bureaucrat's pen. Fortunately, I was born in the greatest country in the world for liberty. However, in this country liberty and the role of government is at a point of contention over certain issues-issues such as gay marriage.

Here is where my proverbial "fork-in-the-road" appears. One of the sad

Professor Snooty Knickerbockers

truths in life that I have realized is that people tend not to be original in thought. Now, what I mean with "original thought" is thinking independently from what you have learned. Hearing both sides of an issue and then developing your own view point. This could mean that after sincere thought and research, you agree with what you have been taught or what the group you associate with believe. More specifically, people tend to just regurgitate what is spoon fed to them from their ideological instruction. This could be the education from a biased establishment or from the guild that the person surrounds themselves with. Instruction is not just from Professor Snooty Knickerbockers in his inveterate style of sweater and disheveled white hair. Instruction or teaching come from whom you associate with and whom also you open your ears and heart to. This could be an author, a radio host, tv personality, celebrity, politician, and etc. From a range of issues, you listen to someone for opinion, whether voluntarily or involuntarily.

Here is where it tends to get tricky. We are in the year 2012. I am currently typing this blog with my blogger app on the New Ipad. Information systems can now be applied to this country as a whole. America is an information system with people's opinions, beliefs, and theories available to our ears and eyes constantly. This is where points of contention become even more contentious. People all have opinions, beliefs, and theories. Furthermore, they have had someone else in life influence them. The tricky part is where your original thought comes in. Where does my original thought come in?

I am a Christian but I am also a Classical Liberal. I could just regurgitate what I was taught about marriage and homosexuality. I could just say, "Marriage is between a man and woman." Now, that is fine to say and you have all the freedom to say this. On the other hand, you can just regurgitate the recurring statement, "Marriage is only about love and should be applied to who ever wants to get married to whoever they love."

I left out the word should in both of those statements because that is the next step towards the point of contention. Marriage should be between a man and woman. Marriage should be applied to all outside the traditional view. The word should has lead to "I want the government to." This is where I take the road less traveled. This is where conservatives label me a "morals-less liberal" and where modern liberals attack me as
"right-wing bigot." At this point of contention, I side with liberty. I don't believe the government has the right or authority to define marriage. There should not be a law created by our federal government to either protect marriage or to redefine marriage. Marriage is not in the hands of the bureaucrat. As a Christian, I have a more traditionalist view on marriage. However, as a Classical Liberal, I believe that government has a very limited role and has NO role when it comes to marriage. I believe States through a referendum by the votes of the people can institute their own marriage laws. I believe that the Constitution supports this and it was the intent of Founding Fathers to allow such personal and even religious events to be decided between individuals and their religious leaders. The Framer's intention can be seen from the Tenth Amendment which states,"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." This involves marriage.

Sorry, conservatives and liberals that want the government to do something about it. Government laws do not make things better. In fact, they make things worse most of the time. What is more, the Supreme Court is not this perfect problem solver to enforce your "shoulds or should nots." They once got into the "defining" game and defined who was property. Ya, you guessed it, slaves. Research the Dred Scott decision.

Most would agree that gay Americans that love each other and want to be in a long term relationship have the right to be, whether a civil union or domestic partnership. However, the issue of marriage is up to the individual and their State respectively. Instead of the government defining marriage, there can be contract laws improved with regards to civil unions. President Obama actually believed this for a while until he "evolved" from it and said he "personally" now believes that gays should have "marriage." However, any person with a mind can see that this admission means nothing legally for the gay marriage movement. It was just a  political ploy to gain more fundraising money.

North Carolina, my home state, is a perfect example of how the marriage issue is properly approached. A referendum of the people determined that marriage was strictly between a man and a woman. The people of North Carolina whether traditionalists or progressives had a chance to exercise their right to vote in order effect their livelihoods. Government is not needed to liberate any slaves. It is a great fallacy of logic to try to compare gay marriage to slavery. Frankly, I am sick of seeing it.

North Carolina in the midst of the referendum on gay marriage.

On the road of life you come to points of contention. We will all disagree on what is right or wrong. Yet, we should all agree that things such as natural rights that include individual liberty, right to life, and property must be first protected. Next, anything that is not authorized to the federal government should left to the people and their States respectively. Marriage is included. America is the greatest country to live and be happy. There are parts of the law that help preserve it. Moreover, our livelihood does not solely depend on the work of some bureaucrat. Gay and straight relationships here in America both depend on a strong economy, security, and liberty. Points of contention like marriage are best left to the individual, not the government.