# Is "Get Government Out Of Marriage" homophobic? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 6, 2014, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550 "2014-10-06T15:00:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/161 "2014-10-24T14:21:09Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > So, do you see? It took me paragraphs just to refute the faulty understanding of just one sentence of your post. I’ll keep trying to come back to the others. But, if you keep ignoring the rebuttals, there’s really not much incentive for me to do so. This referring to my ad hoc, summary statement “‘Better’ means offering more flexibility.” In any case, yes, please do come back to others. I think I understand your concerns. I’m quoting you out of order here to address salient points. > [@](#): > > This to me indicates that you do not understand that the government regulates all private contracts. It regulates them through laws passed by the legislature, by court rulings and by administrative regulations. The government can be limited by constitutional limitations, but in general, the amount of flexibility you have in a contract is determined by the government. I understand this completely. To use a facile example, today, you can’t agree to contract stipulations that are illegal. To be more specific, in the Libertarian view, the role of government isn’t to _regulate_ contracts, or indeed, regulate much of anything (enforcement, though, is a given). This is the point of mutual, consensual contracts. However you’re taking the statist view that the government _must_ interfere, and so your and my positions aren’t unmatched due to intellectual concerns but rather philosophical concerns which is a large gap to bridge. No wonder you ignore the concessions I requested upthread! > [@](#): > > Which means, that private contracts aren’t necessarily more flexible than legal institutions (like marriage). … The flexibility or inflexibility of either contracts or a legal institution (like marriage) is determined by the government. True, in a statist society. > [@](#): > > There’s nothing magical about contracts that make them flexible. If the legislature wanted to regulate marriage-like private contracts and make them inflexible, they could (unless there’s a constitutional limitation). And similarly, if the government wanted to regulate a legal institution (like marriage) and make it inflexible, it could (unless there’s a constitutional limitation). If you take every instance of “regulate” and substitute “interfere in” I think you will see the disconnect. You obviously think that I’m proposing that we legislate marriage away tomorrow without some other, greater change. If you have perceived of my position based on only the limited statements I’ve made rather than the broader picture, than I apologize. But _all_ change requires other change. I think it should be fairly obvious – given the compelling societal interests – that I’ve only painted an incomplete picture. In any case, we’re abusing this thread. I think I’ve sufficiently demonstrated that “get government out of marriage” isn’t a prima facie homophobic reaction. I’m pretty sure I said upthread that given our _current_ laws, we should simply allow gay marriage. I’d suggest we start a new thread because this is kind of fun and bigger picture is much more interesting. ---
**Author:** ![slash2k](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@slash2k](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slash2k)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/162 "2014-10-24T16:06:03Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > True, in a statist society. Even in a laissez-faire society, a contract is only enforceable to the extent that the court system (i.e., the government) is willing to enforce it. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2014, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/163 "2014-10-24T16:14:31Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > Even in a laissez-faire society, a contract is only enforceable to the extent that the court system (i.e., the government) is willing to enforce it. Well, to the extent someone is willing to enforce it. It’s just that once parties give the enforcement to someone else, “flexibility” goes out the window. If you gave it to a corporation that enforces contracts, they’d still have rules for what they would and would not enforce, and what certain terms mean, etc. They can’t not have that. A contract is an agreement between parties. When the parties agree that they are going to do X and Y, everything is fine and no third party is necessary. Enforcement become necessary when party A says they agreed to X and Y and party B says no, it’s Y and Z. You can’t just say that the parties will enforce their own contracts, because the parties disagree. You can’t just let the bigger one win or you don’t actually have a contract. You can’t pick some random dude to interpret it or do Ro-Sham-Bo because, again, if the contract does not mean what it purports to mean, what good is a contract? “This contract means something until we disagree about what it means at which point it becomes random” means that any time someone wanted out of a contract, they’d just say, “I totally disagree about what this says. 1-2-3… Scissors!” ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/164 "2014-10-25T00:51:08Z")
I’m gonna have to go back and re-read the thread here, since I may have missed some stuff, so I’m deleting this post. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/165 "2014-10-25T00:59:04Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > This referring to my ad hoc, summary statement “‘Better’ means offering more flexibility.” In any case, yes, please do come back to others. I think I understand your concerns. > > I’m quoting you out of order here to address salient points. > > I understand this completely. To use a facile example, today, you can’t agree to contract stipulations that are illegal. To be more specific, in the Libertarian view, the role of government isn’t to _regulate_ contracts, or indeed, regulate much of anything (enforcement, though, is a given). This is the point of mutual, consensual contracts. However you’re taking the statist view that the government _must_ interfere, and so your and my positions aren’t unmatched due to intellectual concerns but rather philosophical concerns which is a large gap to bridge. No wonder you ignore the concessions I requested upthread! > > True, in a statist society. > > If you take every instance of “regulate” and substitute “interfere in” I think you will see the disconnect. You obviously think that I’m proposing that we legislate marriage away tomorrow without some other, greater change. If you have perceived of my position based on only the limited statements I’ve made rather than the broader picture, than I apologize. But _all_ change requires other change. I think it should be fairly obvious – given the compelling societal interests – that I’ve only painted an incomplete picture. > > In any case, we’re abusing this thread. I think I’ve sufficiently demonstrated that “get government out of marriage” isn’t a prima facie homophobic reaction. I’m pretty sure I said upthread that given our _current_ laws, we should simply allow gay marriage. I’d suggest we start a new thread because this is kind of fun and bigger picture is much more interesting. Ok, I think it’s clearer to me where you are coming from. You want a complete overhaul of the legal system from a libertarian standpoint. You think the government should be out of pretty much everything, not just marriage. I don’t agree and a lot of people in the US don’t agree. But, I’ll re-examine your posts in that light, and reframe my arguments. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/166 "2014-10-25T01:18:14Z")
Sorry for the triple posting. **Balthisar** , let’s back up and talk up medical power-of-attorney. Let’s take the issue of how medical decisions are made for me if I’m unable to make them. Currently, this is the way CA works. If I’m single, then there’s a default set of regulations about who gets to make those decisions. If I’m married, there’s a slightly different default set of regulations. I can override those default regulations by drafting a medical power-of-attorney. There are regulations as to how I have to draft, and if I mess up, there are regulations as to how to resolve the mistake. Then there are regulations as to how third parties (like hospitals) and the government have to interact with my medical power-of-attorney. So, there’s a whole set of regulations that ultimately tell the hospital how to deal with me if I’m incapacitated. How does this work in Libertopia? If I haven’t drafted anything, who makes my medical decisions? Are there regulations for that sort of thing? If I have drafted a medical power-of-attorney, does a hospital have to recognize it in Libertopia? In the absence of regulations, what compels them to recognize my medical power-of-attorney? If they decide they don’t want to recognize it, then who makes my medical decisions? Walk me through it. In Libertopia, if I am incapacitated, how do my medical decisions get made? And how does Libertopia deal with me if I never drafted anything? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/167 "2014-10-25T01:58:02Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > How does this work in Libertopia? If I haven’t drafted anything, who makes my medical decisions? The highest bidder, I would assume. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/168 "2014-10-25T02:03:46Z")
Or the guy with the most guns. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/169 "2014-10-25T02:09:59Z")
Same thing. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/170 "2014-10-25T07:20:00Z")
Ah, come on. Let him answer. I want to get a clear picture of exactly what kind of system he is proposing. ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2014, 9:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550/171 "2014-10-25T09:42:55Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > What I’m wondering is, why do I never hear this when talking about literally anything other than gay marriage? You hear it when talking about marriage. I’ve got to kind of wonder, do you spend any time talking or reading about marriage, other than gay marriage? Not that there is anything wrong with that… gay marriage is kinda of a common question for debate at present. The other half of the question is, should the church be involved in marriage at all? There are certainly branches of the Christian Church that think that the Church has no business in the marriage area, which is a government concern. Which is connected to the question of the church in society, which is connected to the question of government in society, which is connected to the question of the individual in society — all of which are pretty common areas for thought and discussion, and most of the thought and discussion hasn’t touched on sexuality at all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-get-government-out-of-marriage-homophobic/700550.md?page=8)