Same-sex marriage isn’t the issue—it’s the State

As usual, the arena of American political discourse has sparked emotions and fury over same-sex marriage on each side of the aisle. Just when live-and-let-live, quasi-libertarian New England seemed to be completing its campaign to legalize same-sex marriage, this past Election Day, the state of Maine repealed a law that granted same-sex couples the right to be married. Many members of the Columbia community, especially on this campus where the moral framework is one of tolerance, are disappointed. The debate over same-sex marriage usually ranges as follows: Members of the far political left, some Democrats, and the LGBTQ community push for same-sex marriage rights equal to those of heterosexual couples, whereas social conservatives see this as government redefining the lines of what marriage is in accordance with its own moral ideals and religious customs. Who’s right? In essence they both are, since at the core, both sides are arguing for a legitimate moral cause that has been entirely politicized, a debate where one opinion prevails and thus delegitimizes the other.

Libertarians offer an unconventional perspective on this issue that is often drowned out of the political sphere. Both sides have been poisoned by the toxicity of Statism. We witness this all the time with a plethora of issues that are the result of needless government meddling in the lives of civil society. The great classic liberal political philosopher Ludwig von Mises once wrote that a government policy often requires two additional policies to remedy the unintended consequences that are set off by the first policy, and this in turn creates a self-sustaining chain of government intrusions. Libertarianism is an ethical philosophy that provides ample clarity for tricky issues by providing the rational antidote in a maelstrom of turmoil. It does so by elucidating the muddled fact that the problem here is not same-sex couples or the orthodox defense of marriage, but in fact, it is none other than the State itself. It is the State that gets involved in the private affairs of individuals, that aggresses and blatantly violates the natural rights of individuals, and furthermore, fosters an environment of social tension between people of different views. It is pure irony that baffles me as to why same-sex couples seek the aid and approval of the very same entity that has been cruel and merciless to them throughout history!

Libertarians make it clear that is not the actions of people that restrict same-sex marriage, but rather the one-size-fits-all edicts of the State. It is not conservative, traditional, orthodox crusaders of a thousand religious denominations that deny access to same-sex couples. It is the State that provides a means of enabling the many orthodox crusaders of heterosexual marriage to outlaw same-sex marriages. The direct ballot referendum in Maine is just one example of such a means to an end. If two homosexual individuals want to enter into a voluntary association and, by extension, divide and share their assets such as houses, cars, pets, and stock portfolios, they have the natural right to do so, just as two heterosexual individuals do. In a totally voluntary society, you would have individuals entering into these voluntary arrangements, and no one would be able to stop two homosexuals from doing so. Sure, there might be social unrest on behalf of traditional members of religious denominations, but in a free society, especially in one with a variety of cultural values, everyone is necessarily free to disagree and debate and protest, as long as it is done in a civil, peaceful manner. This is one of the intrinsic properties of free society: individuals are left to pursue their own ends, as long as they do not violate or aggress against the life, liberty, or property of any other individual. For practical reasons, if the government has to grant special privileges to opposite-sex marriages, these too should be extended to same-sex marriages. Case closed.

At its core, the real issue is not entering into the political arena to debate same-sex marriage or the orthodox defense of marriage, but rather solidifying a principled defense of preserving the natural rights of free people with a universal libertarian ethic against the coercive intrusions of the parasitic tentacles of that beasty Leviathan called the State.

The author is a Columbia College sophomore. He is the vice president of Columbia University Libertarians and writes for Mises Daily, the online publication journal of the Ludwig von Mises Institute.