Mailbag: Aggressive on Gays

Friday, April 15, 2005

Red Sand questions my agenda:

I'm wondering why you take such a hostile position against gays (this wasn't your first post on gay marriage) when you claim to be a Libertarian who favors a small government that doesn't interfere with private matters.
That my support of sound judicial review has led some to believe I have "hostility" toward gays proves how diluted the purpose of government has become in the minds of today's society.

Correct. I support small government...the smallest government possible that is still able to protect its people and insure our government functions as it was designed to do so.

The case in Oregon is about the complete rejection of a constitutional amendment and the will of the people to refuse gay marriage. Such is life; we can't all have the laws reflect our individual preferences.

In an earlier post Stryker wrote, "I still haven't heard a single good reason to prohibit gays from marrying." Perhaps he is correct, but is that justification to ignore a constitutional amendment because he doesn't like it?

Should we encourage government officials to ignore a law that prohibits when "there isn't a single good reason" that law is in place? No democratic society can survive when laws – even unpopular ones – are ignored.