Friday, September 02, 2005

Same Sex Marriages

George Gilder, an early conservative, wrote the Naked Nomad in 1974 in which he described the benefits to society that married couples deliver. Marriage is not (as Dr. Laura would say) about commingling bodily fluids; it is about commingling assets, aspirations, responsibilities, and residence. This fusing together is what delivers stability and productivity to our society. Because it delivers stability and prosperity it should be rewarded with tax and societal benefits. If Gilder had been consulted on the rebuilding of Iraq, he would have recommended that all married Iraqi military personnel be sent home to their families with a pardon and a re-education/re-employment stipend. All unmarried males (18 to 36 years olds, the ‘naked nomads’) would have been given a gun, a pack, and coalition officers and sent to Afghanistan to look for OBL. (been removed from society at least temporarily) Married men with responsibilities do not build roadside or suicide bombs, they go to work every day building a future for themselves and their families and in the process build stability, prosperity, and success for society.

While my data is all anecdotal and very limited; (I only know two same-sex couples, one male and one female), I believe that same-sex couples will deliver all the benefits Gilder identified in his book as being delivered by heterosexual couples. This being the case, to discriminate against giving same sex marriage the same rewards based upon moral or religious thought makes one a bigot, to discriminate because they are different (xenophobia) makes you a racist. To use legislation and prison (force) to impose your religious or xenophobic beliefs on others makes you a criminal.

If the Republicans are arguing that same-sex marriages don’t deliver the same benefits to society that heterosexual marriages deliver, I would be interested in seeing their evidence and we will make the decision on the data. If they are arguing on some other principle, there will be no way for them to escape accusations of racism and bigotry. To argue that this in some way opens the door to other types of unions so be it, I believe any union that delivers benefits to society (as identified by Gilder) should be recognized. My personal experiences with polygamists are even more limited but I don’t believe polygamist unions deliver any benefits and as such require no recognition. If you have data to the contrary, I can be convinced.

For Republicans this is a lose-lose issue. I see them as much more dangerous to the family and its place in society than the same-sex community. You would think that the Liberals set a trap for them, but then I can’t believe the Liberals are that smart.