Robert Levy, Chairman of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, wrote an op-ed for the New York Daily News. His main point is that denying marriage to gays is unconstitutional. Government may discriminate (no drivers licenses for pre-teens), but to do so it must (1) demonstrate a compelling need, (2) show the laws that implement that discrimination are effective, and (3) narrowly craft the laws so they don't reach more broadly than necessary.
Yet, in the case of gay marriage, no compelling reason has been offered. The stated goals of the discrimination (strengthening straight marriage, protecting kids, ensuring procreation) are not met by banning gays from it. Those goals might be served through banning no-fault divorce (which Karl Rove just took advantage of), banning premarital cohabitation, or banning infertile couples from getting married. Instead, most states and the feds heap benefits on straight couples and deny them from gay couples.
Government can choose what criteria prompt what benefits. This criteria doesn't have to be based on the word marriage, which can be turned over to private institutions.
For those with short memories… Karl Rove engineered a slew of marriage protection votes in 2004 (including here in Michigan) to prompt Fundies to reelect Bush. The big reason for the push was to protect marriage. Yet he sees no need to protect his own. Thus Between The Lines gives him the title of Creep of the Week.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment