Monday, June 27, 2011
It strikes me that many people are espousing a "libertarian" view of marriage in light of the recent New York State legislation allowing same-sex couples to get marriage licenses. This view of which I speak is basically that the government should get out of the "marriage business" altogether, and leave marriage to the churches. How very "libertarian," right?
Not necessarily. Most of the people who recommend this as a solution to the gay marriage issue are either opponents of gay marriage willing to throw the baby out with the bath water, or else opponents of marriage in general (which, in my estimation, makes them libertines, not libertarians).
The thing is, there are many reasons why marriages should be recognized by government. For one thing, making private contracts--over a thousand private contracts, by the way--can not replace the panoply of rights and privileges that couples gain by marrying. Are these "libertarians" recommending that these rights and privileges no longer be extended to married couples? Rights and privileges such as... inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights, power of attorney, joint ownership of property and tax status, etc? (These are just a few, and there are hundreds and hundreds more, some that I don't even know about.) Would they recommend that straight couples who want to jointly own property go through a contract lawyer to arrange it? Or that they specify in their wills that the other spouse gets to keep the house should the first spouse die? Or that they are legally next of kin and can make legal, medical, and funeral decisions for each other? (I can see one advantage to this approach... spouses could not be held legally responsible for each others' debt unless it were acquired jointly.)
I'm going to continue to think of reasons why government not only shouldn't, but CAN'T get out of the "marriage business," and then post them here. If you think of some, please feel free to e-mail them to me.
|
Not necessarily. Most of the people who recommend this as a solution to the gay marriage issue are either opponents of gay marriage willing to throw the baby out with the bath water, or else opponents of marriage in general (which, in my estimation, makes them libertines, not libertarians).
The thing is, there are many reasons why marriages should be recognized by government. For one thing, making private contracts--over a thousand private contracts, by the way--can not replace the panoply of rights and privileges that couples gain by marrying. Are these "libertarians" recommending that these rights and privileges no longer be extended to married couples? Rights and privileges such as... inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights, power of attorney, joint ownership of property and tax status, etc? (These are just a few, and there are hundreds and hundreds more, some that I don't even know about.) Would they recommend that straight couples who want to jointly own property go through a contract lawyer to arrange it? Or that they specify in their wills that the other spouse gets to keep the house should the first spouse die? Or that they are legally next of kin and can make legal, medical, and funeral decisions for each other? (I can see one advantage to this approach... spouses could not be held legally responsible for each others' debt unless it were acquired jointly.)
I'm going to continue to think of reasons why government not only shouldn't, but CAN'T get out of the "marriage business," and then post them here. If you think of some, please feel free to e-mail them to me.
|
