Same Sex Marriage Proof of Intrusive Government?

same sex marriage

Same sex marriage provides some insight into how the government has intrusive tendencies. The Supreme Court’s blocking council for same sex marriage legalization in Virginia further raises questions about governmental intrusions into the liberties of individuals.

The age-old debate is being brought to light by Libertarian Constitutionalists. Libertarian Constitutionalists, like Ron Paul, do not think that the government should have any say in what the “sanctity of marriage” means.

Same sex marriage is ultimately about the consenting of partners, while heterosexuality has the same outcome of companionship. The foundation of these relationships are basically equivalent. The surface issue is how current legislation affects the liberty of individuals who are in same sex relationships.

Marriage benefits recognized by the federal government have become a huge livelihood of same sex marriage in a financial manner when it comes to matters of taxation and federal benefits. Examples of such federal benefits include conjugal prison visits, taxes and bankruptcies.

A problem is that the federal government and licensing offers no foundation for the relationships but puts more validation on the marriages’ consequences to state legislatures, statistics and the economy. Despite documents upheld by the Supreme Court as the foundations of America’s legal system, like the Constitution and Bill of Rights, same sex couples are still having their liberties and rights ignored and violated. Instead of actively doing all that is within it power to uphold the liberties of individuals involved in same sex relationships, the federal government prevails as a focal point for intrusive tactics.

A law getting branded as being unconstitutional is yet another method that the federal government has used to limit the liberties of individuals in same sex relationships. An example is when California had Proposition 8 ruled unconstituational. Insuring that gay marriage will constantly be in a place of being recognized seems to be an uphill battle when seeming victories in court can be later overturned. The fine print of Constitutional regulations, allowing laws to be repealed over time, leaves same sex couples in a cycle of petitions to have their rights recognized

What is at stake is that individual liberties are being sporadically overturned because of the bias of the few. That is indicative of how government can interfere with the very liberties that are promised to all. The relationship between the federal government and millions of Americans is adversely affected due to the federal government’s not upholding rights and liberties promised by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. If it did act to uphold these rights and liberties, such discrimination would be greatly diminished.

The Defense of Marriage Act has also been repealed on numerous occasions. Politicians, often motivated by wanting to get re-elected and pleasing some of their political constituents who oppose same sex marriage, flip flop in their stances. The result can be that the liberties and rights of same sex couples are considered to be not as important as the rights of a particular states’ majority of heterosexual married couples. This can result in the denying of the rights of same sex couples and can seem to be the result of homophobic tactics. The denial of these liberties and rights to couples in same sex marriages continues to serve as proof of government intrusion.

The Libertarian party supports an individual’s rights to privacy without compromising collective rights. Ron Paul has accumulated scathing criticism for opening up to his interviewers, saying that he does not agree with same sex marriage; but nevertheless, he has also stated that his opinion should not infringe on others. Paul’s views can seem to be paradoxical, as he has a bias as to what constitutes a legal marriage; but, he staunchly supports the rights of people who hold different beliefs when it comes to hot button issues like same sex marriages.

Taxes are also laced into the equation for politicians. Same sex couples are paying these taxes while not having the element of equal representation met. Since taxes cannot be avoided, they are not voluntary. They are a part of living in the United States, for both heterosexual married couples and same sex married couples.

Government’s involvement in personal affairs has become a breaking point for many to seek out third parties which advocate ensuring and protecting the liberties and rights of everyone, no matter his of her sexual preference. For others, the federal government’s stance on same sex marriage proves that government is too intrusive, to the point of protecting very few liberties and rights of same sex couples, other than occasionally when it comes to the personal financial affairs of these couples and enriching its coffers with their taxes.

By Jordan Davis


Huffington Post


2 Responses to "Same Sex Marriage Proof of Intrusive Government?"

  1. Dan Mauller   August 25, 2014 at 7:40 am

    ‘Libertarian Constitutionalists, like Ron Paul, do not think that the government should have any say in what the “sanctity of marriage” means.

    Good news, Ron! “Sanctity” is the purview of religion, not government. The government only has a say in which marriages are legally recognized.

  2. glenwoodsurvivor   August 23, 2014 at 9:39 pm

    Of course, Ron Paul ONLY said this ONCE gay couples started to marry. He was never opposed to “government marriage” when he got married, or his children married, or his grand children married. Paul is and always has been a hypocrite on social freedom.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.