http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/03/05/phillies-blasts-obama-on-gblt-issues/ 
 
The 2004 LP Platform said: "We oppose adding women to the pool of those
eligible for and subject to the draft, not because we think that as a rule
women are unfit for combat, but because we believe that this step enlarges
the number of people subjected to government tyranny."  If gays qua gays
were exempt from draft registration, would the Outright Libertarians say the
same thing about LGBTQ folk as the 2004 Platform said above for women?  I
would hope that the Libertarians would oppose such blatantly bigoted
government policies, even when they nominally decrease aggression against
the targeted minority.
 
George, I applaud the intent behind your effort to use gay marriage a wedge
issue against gay-friendly Democrats, but I'd be surprised if someone as
smart as you could think of no significant differences between Obama's
support for separate but equal marriage for gays and segregationists'
support for "separate but equal" schools for blacks.  If we defenders of gay
rights can advocate marriage equality as a path toward privatizing marriage,
might not Obama simply be a friend of gay rights who sees civil unions as a
path toward marriage equality?
 
Is invoking Faubus supposed to suggest that Obama can be assumed to be
somehow bigoted against gays?  Wouldn't suggesting that run the risk of
alienating the same gay-friendly voters we're trying to peel away from
Obama?  To ask it another way: when polls show that the 35% of Americans who
support gay marriage rises to 53% when including supporters of civil unions,
are we libertarians mistaken in saying that more than half of Americans want
to move toward greater marriage equality for gays?  Are you saying the 18%
of Americans who support civil unions but not gay marriage are as bad on gay
rights as Southern segregationists were on black rights?
 
Searches against the Outright web site and blog reveal no definitive stance
on whether advocacy of civil unions is commendable, but various postings
suggest that it's at least a tepid step in the right direction.  I tend to
agree.  Until we can get the government out of marriage, we can at least get
the government's anti-gay bigotry out of marriage.  And until we do that, we
can at least use civil unions to bring immediate and practical relief to
LGBTQ Americans while they add to the overwhelming evidence that their
relationships are not a threat to anybody's values or institutions.

Reply via email to