December 24, 2008

Liberals are so tolerant…

Filed under: culture & social issues,history & holidays by Victoria Liberty @ 3:43 pm

How tolerant and accepting liberals are. Not! 

They just took over the presidency, the Senate, and the House, and now they’re throwing fits because Obama picked one slightly conservative person to speak for a few seconds at his inauguration. Obama’s choice of pastor Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration was a gesture of inclusion and a way of saying that Obama actually values conservatives. Now, liberals are saying Obama’s choice was bigoted because Warren opposes gay marriage. Apparently, being inclusive means doing whatever it takes to avoid anything that might even remotely be considered offensive to gays and lesbians, even if it means completely excluding all conservatives. Well, I think that conservatives are just as important as gays and lesbians. I approve of Obama’s decision to bring some actual diversity to his inauguration by choosing someone conservative. A group of people who all think identically and believe the exact same things isn’t very diverse.

On another note, Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas

December 14, 2008

Marriage is not a right

Filed under: culture & social issues by Victoria Liberty @ 8:46 pm

Since Proposition 8 was passed, outlawing gay marriage in California, liberals have been complaining almost nonstop that gay people’s rights are being violated. First of all, this irks me because the liberals creamed conservatives on election day, taking control of the presidency and Congress and killing Question 1 in Massachusetts. You’d think this would be enough to make them happy. But you’d be wrong.

Gay marriage supporters like to compare their struggle with African Americans’ struggle for civil rights. This is a completely inaccurate analogy. At various times in our history, blacks were subjected to slavery, were unable to vote, were lynched, and their property was vandalized.  All people have a fundamental right to vote, own property, make their own decisions, and of course own themselves, so the treatment of blacks described above violated their rights.

On the other hand, gay rights activists are arguing that their rights are being violated because they cannot get married. This isn’t true, because marriage is not a right. Gay people, just like everyone else, have the rights to own property, own themselves, make choices, and live without interference, but they don’t have a right to marriage.

By arguing that they have a fundamental right to marriage, gay people are themselves being discriminatory, because marriage is an inherently discriminatory institution. It discriminates against people who choose not to get married. Basically, marriage is when the government gives people benefits (such as tax breaks) for deciding to form a lifelong partnership with another person. By giving benefits to married people that it does not give to single people, the government sends the message that married people are superior to single people. This is simply wrong. There are many reasons why individuals would rahter be single than married: maybe they are asexual, maybe they would like to live alone and be in control of their own house, maybe they would rather date lots of different people instead of committing to one. Whatever the reason, single people are just as good as married people, and being single is just as desirable a state as being married.

When people claim that gays have a right to marry people of the same gender, they are actually saying that gays have a right to be treated in a way that discriminates against single people. It makes sense to argue that gay people have a right to form any consensual relationship they want. It does not make sense to argue that gay people have a right to form a lifelong partnership with someone of the same gender and get government benefits for it.

I am not being anti-gay, since I don’t think straight people have a right to marriage either. Instead, the government shouldn’t be in the business of granting recognition to relationships in the first place. People should be able to form whatever relationships they want and call them whatever they want to.

Owning property, making one’s own decisions about medicine, and bearing arms are all examples of fundamental rights. These rights are currently being violated due to the 16th Amendment, the Durham-Humphrey Amendment to the Pure Food and Drug Act, and the Brady Bill, respectively, acts which, interestingly enough, are predominantly supported by liberals. It’s awfully hypocritical to oppose the rights to own property, make decisions autonomously, and bear arms, while claiming that there is a fundamental right to marriage.

November 5, 2008

Some good news

Filed under: culture & social issues,politics by Victoria Liberty @ 12:10 pm

After my (appropriately) depressing post about the election yesterday, I thought I’d recap the few good decisions voters made. Yes, I said that America did the wrong thing on almost every choice, but “almost” is the key word. Here are the few things voters did right:

  • It looks like Proposition 8 is going to pass in California! I’m very pleasantly surprised that a state with such a liberal reputation is actually trying to put an end to gay marriage. Marriage is not a right, and the voters have every right to ban it. I hope the state government doesn’t somehow try to overrule the people’s decision like Massachusetts did.
  • Arizona and Florida approved resolutions to ban gay marriage, too.
  • Nebraska voted to end affirmative action. This discriminatory practice is insulting and unfair to people of all races and genders.
  • Washington voted to allow doctor-assisted suicide. Committing suicide does not hurt anyone and is not immoral, so there is no reason why people shouldn’t be allowed to do it if they choose to.
  • Colorado rejected an amendment that would define “person” as “any human being from the moment of fertilization.” In philosophy, a person is defined as a rational, autonomous being. Fetuses (and babies, by the way) are therefore not persons, and to define them as such would be contrary to the rules of the English language.

August 27, 2008

What’s up with the State Legislature?

Filed under: culture & social issues,health,personal liberty,politics by Victoria Liberty @ 8:40 pm

Recently, it seems like every law the Massachusetts State Legislature passes restricts our liberty. Here are some examples:

  • In 2006, it became illegal to ride in a car without a seat belt. Officers now have the power to stop a car just because they see someone not wearing a seat belt, and issue a fine to the “offender.”
  • Since 2006, all Massachusetts residents are required to have health insurance. This is a blatant violation of people’s rights to choose how they want to spend their own money. I guess it didn’t occur to the Legislature that in a capitalist country, the economy should be based on people choosing to buy the products and services that they want, not being forced to buy what the government thinks they should.
  • In June of 2007, the Legislature killed a measure to allow the people to vote on whether or not to ban gay marriage. There goes the people’s right to democracy.
  • On September 1, 2007, getting a license became a lot harder for teenage drivers. Thankfully, the legislature didn’t raise the driving age to 17 1/2, as some people wanted, but they increased training requirements from 6 to 12 hours behind the wheel at drivers’ education and from 12 to 40 hours driving with a parent or other adult.
  • A law went into effect on July 10, 2008, that requires all children under age 8 to sit in booster seats or car seats while in the car. Personally, I started sitting in the front seat of the car without a child seat of any kind when I was 4 or 5, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Forcing a 7-year-old to sit in a booster seat is ridiculous. The government has no right to tell people how they have to sit in their own cars.
  • On July 31, 2008, Governor Deval Patrick signed the repeal of the 1913 law that prevents out-of-state gay couples from marrying in Massachusetts. This spreads gay marriage to the entire country and violates the rights of citizens from other states to set their own marriage laws.
  • According to ban kids under 14 from riding all-terrain vehicles, and require everyone who rides an ATV to wear a helmet. The House is in the process of discussing the bill.

Perhaps these laws have made the state safer, but collectively they have made Massachusetts a lot less free. The State Legislature seems to be slowly but surely shrinking the amount of things people are allowed to do, and that is not good. Governments simply do not have the right to ban things that aren’t immoral and don’t hurt other people.

Ronald Reagan once said, “I don’t believe in a government that protects us from ourselves.” I couldn’t agree with him more.

August 30, 2007

Gay marriage in Iowa

Filed under: culture & social issues by Victoria Liberty @ 9:08 pm

A district court in Iowa ruled today that gay marriage is legal under the state’s constitution. This ruling overturns a state law limiting marriage to unions between one man and one woman. The case, which involved six same-sex couples who want to marry, will advance to the Iowa Supreme Court. As an opponent of gay marriage, I hope the Supreme Court decides to keep marriage laws in the state the way they are.

Previous PageNext Page