|
February 24, 2004
Apples, oranges, and other fruits of licensing
Here's a story which isn't going to go away, nor should it. The right to arms is constitutionally guaranteed. The right to keep and bear your homosexual marriage is not. Of course, I wonder what the opinions of gay gun nuts are on the issue?Say Uncle refers, of course, to this letter (which touches on an issue near and dear to my heart): I am a gun owner and I live a gun owner life style.For sending that letter, the author has been subjected to police harrassment, has been told to kill himself, and, most recently, has had the FBI sicced on him. (From Publicola via Glenn Reynolds.) Once again, guns and gays. To me, this is not "apples and oranges." It's a fundamental issue of freedom, of privacy, of a right to live your life as you see fit. If there is no right to self defense, then I submit the right to privacy is meaningless. As I said in July, "No matter what you're allowed do inside your home, it ain't much of a castle if you can't defend it!" Some of this may have to do with the managerial class mentality (via Glenn Reynolds): since managing a society is conceived as an intricate undertaking, naturally it is seen as requiring specialized training. That means the willing hands will be in school for awhile. The managerial class is large. It includes not just elected and appointed officialdom, but the class of civil servants and, around them, the advocacy groups and journals of opinion. The longer anyone spends in post-secondary education, particularly in the departments dedicated to training "the leaders of tomorrow" - political science, administration, education and the other humanities departments that even Chad Orzel's letter concedes skew left politically - the more likely they are to know, like and identify with the trainees. Shared circumstance becomes shared values - that would seem to be the very meaning of class consciousness.The managerial class tends naturally to hate guns, and tends toward communitarian thinking. Thus, they see gay rights and gun rights as distinctly different. Libertarians, on the other hand, see individual autonomy as including both. Thus, whether the issues are "apples and oranges" depend on whether one adheres to a control mindset or a freedom mindset. I am as against gun control as I am penis control, and I see no contradiction at all, but let me take a stab at analyzing two comments, by the same source: this one I do feel compelled to point out that it would awfully difficult for somebody to kill me with their homosexuality, so it's not exactly a valid comparison...and this one: Constitutionality and current law aside, it's very difficult to argue that homosexuality poses anywhere near the sort of public safety risk that guns potentially could. And whether or not they do a good job of it, protecting public safety is a valid function of government. That, to me, is where the comparison falls flat.The problem with Tom's "public safety" argument is precisely that it is a communitarian, not libertarian one. The moral conservatives use the very same argument in favor of laws restricting homosexuals that the liberal gun-grabbers against guns. Here's a more extreme one: The homosexual life is a violent one. Many common homosexual acts themselves do violence to the body. Beyond that, sado-masochism, the intentional infliction of pain for perverse sexual gratification, is very popular in the homosexual community. And even the homosexuals have begun to admit that there is a disproportionate amount of “domestic violence” in their communities, violence directed inward.And here is a more mainstream "public health" argument: If you accept the usual liberal public health arguments (such as applied to guns), these are all legitimate public health arguments for regulating homosexual anal sex--even if the law is overbroad, affecting the relatively small percentage of gay men who are in permanent, mutually monogamous relationships. After all, liberals don't mind that many gun control laws are even more overbroad, impacting the vast majority of gun owners who will never misuse a gun.As I told the above blogger when he left a comment to one of my numerous posts about homosexuality and guns, I don't care what liberals or conservatives mind, nor do I care how many foolish people die because of stupidity; I oppose such restrictions on personal autonomy as a threat to human freedom.For more detail on the public health arguments against homosexuality, visit Nathan's site and click on his numerous links. One can invoke public health or public policy arguments from now till doomsday, but if you believe in personal freedom, they should be considered no more than advice. To those possessed of the regulatory mindset, though, they are an argument for repressive laws. The argument that "homosexuality kills" is about as logical and persuasive as the argument that "guns kill." Which is to say, NOT AT ALL! posted by Eric on 02.24.04 at 12:39 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/779 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Apples, oranges, and other fruits of licensing:
» Guns and Gays Update from Say Uncle
Eric, a gay gun nut, has some insight with respect to the comparison of the right to arms to the right to marry whoever you... [Read More] Tracked on February 24, 2004 09:17 AM
» This Is Too Weird from Mind of Mog
This is incomprehensible, here a guy writes a rethorical letter clearly intended to show the that the city of San Francisco is engaging in unlawful activity, challenging their hypocrisy, and they send the cops after him. Obviously, they didn't get i... [Read More] Tracked on February 27, 2004 01:12 AM
Comments
That guy and his site have quite a set of balls. "This issue does not reflect our stance on same-sex marriage." Sure...anyone who spouts off about "agendas" and "homosexual marriage" is a big fan of the gay community. I don't have a lot of sympathy for someone who has such animus for people who have done absolutely nothing to harm him. James · February 24, 2004 02:08 AM Sure...anyone who spouts off about "agendas" and "homosexual marriage" is a big fan of the gay community. As a bona fide homo, I find it strange that "homosexual" has become an almost dirty word. Gay sounds better, sure, but it's still odd that you know right off the bat that someone opposes homosexual marriage when they call it homosexual marriage. Skip Perry · February 24, 2004 05:58 AM I call it homosexual marriage for the same reason I call the other kind heterosexual marriage. I'm for both equally! A more accurate spectrum would be: androsexual (man-man) marriage, andro-gynosexual marriage (man-woman), gynosexual marriage (woman-woman). I'm for all three, but that last is what I love the most. Holy Dawn and her holy wife Norma. ...and wicked Wanda, ha! ha! ha! Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping gun-loving selfish aesthete · February 24, 2004 07:22 AM Perhaps I should have included also Santoro-sexual (man-dog) marriage. har! har! Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping gun-loving selfish aesthete · February 24, 2004 07:31 AM Skip, I can tell because people who use the word "homosexual" in that content are trying to make the issue clinical. Depersonalize. You will never hear these types of people say "same-sex marriage". They want people to think of this as some kind of sickness or freaky trend. And the biggest tipoff of all is "agenda". I didn't approve of what Newsom did. But I would never use the word "agenda". That is a classic WorldNetDaily, bigot word. James · February 24, 2004 03:35 PM I remember seeing ad for the NRA which I loved: a pistol next to a box of condoms and "If the government doesn't belong in your bedroom, what's it doing in your dresser drawer?" I think that was the Second Amendment Foundation (saf.org). Unfortunatley, I don't believe the NRA is that creative in it's thinking. Anonymous · February 24, 2004 06:12 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Laughing at the failure of discourse?
Holiday Blogging The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Once again: Splendid! You said it all.
I remember seeing ad for the NRA which I loved: a pistol next to a box of condoms and "If the government doesn't belong in your bedroom, what's it doing in your dresser drawer?"
Never give up your gun. Never give up your freedom.