For the past several years I’ve been writing about the fact that the push for gay marriage isn’t just about rights for homosexuals. It’s about discarding the understanding of God-endowed unalienable rights that is the basis for constitutional self-government in the United States. I’ve also traced the logic that makes it clear that the campaign to deny and disparage the God-endowed rights of the natural family strikes at the root of private property rights as a whole.
Dear Alan Keyes…
Gay people marrying does not affect your marriage.
In other news? You eating cake does not affect my cake.
The problem is that, starting with the body itself, all things are not equal. That fact is clear from the moment we’re born. Human infants cannot survive on their own. Someone else has to use her body to provide food, procure warmth and otherwise assure the comfort and survival of the infant’s body. In fact, except for the physical exertions of others (the exertions involved in the act of procreation, the labor involved in child-bearing and birth) the child would have no body at all.
I love it when you talk dirty.
See me in my room, wear the knickers…
Melissa Harris-Perry obviously rejects the logic of unalienable right as it applies to the natural family. But if the relationship of mutual belonging that God’s natural law establishes between parents and children is not an unalienable property of our human nature, what is? Is property right simply a function of power, such that the world and all those in it belong to whomever has the power to seize and hold on to them? If whole communities can run roughshod over the self-evident natural rights of a child’s parents, what belongings does justice secure from the depredations of those in power? Once every mother’s son is raised to believe that he belongs to no one in particular, what will be the existential basis for individual identity, individual aspiration, individual achievement and responsibility?
All I read is quasi-intellectual wank.
We regularly break “property rights” of parent over child if the parent is incapable of being a parent or if the parent ceases to be alive. We don’t simply chain orphans to gravestones. We don’t live children with their biological and abusive or incompetent parents. Adoption is an actual thing.
For those of us who understanding the true implications of the push for homosexual marriage rights, Harris-Perry’s collectivist drivel is, as the saying goes, the sound of the other shoe dropping. Once government fiat has been substituted for God-endowed right as the basis for the institution of family, the next step is the implementation of the view Harris-Perry articulates, that from birth individuals belong to the state. People who don’t own themselves obviously can’t own anything else – which erases the basis for private property rights.
Wait so if gays can get married then the means of production will belong to the proletariat? I fail to see how that would happen? Alan Keyes should be taught causation and so explain how “Two Guys Get Their Marriage Legally Recognised” will become “Private Property does not Exist”.
Mate, if you grasped for any more straws the cows won’t have owt to eat.
Also? For a black guy to support the “original constitution” without it’s ensuing amendments just shows a total lack of historical perspective.