Response to Arcanus - "Do Homosexuals have equal rights"

[tavarish]

I'll just let it be known that Arcanus (Ryft, David Smart) didn't write that. Adam did, and he paraphrased it from a Stand to Reason radio show, led by Greg Koukl.

Arcanus actually has a different stance, which I largely agree with, other than his last point.

1. There are rights that spouses and families enjoy due to marriage that are not extended to all individuals equally (e.g., family visitation rights in hospitals or prisons, tax-free transfer of property, various pensions and benefits). By denying same-sex unions a marriage license, the state denies them legal recognition as spouses and families; thus, the grievance that the rights of individuals are not given equal protection under the law. One of the reasons same-sex couples fight for a marriage license is to have those state-recognized rights that spouses and families enjoy.

2. The word "accrue" means to gain or receive by accumulation; with respect to the rights of individuals under American law (q.v. your reference to California), the word is inapplicable. American citizens do not receive rights from the government; in fact, that is completely backwards, for it is the government that receives rights from the people via the U.S. Constitution. Recall that the Declaration of Independence was about rejecting the British empire and its "divine right of kings," establishing the New World on the "consent of the governed" whereby the people would enumerate certain powers and rights to the government through the Constitution; i.e., the people are sovereign, not the government. "We the People" did not erect a government to grant or establish the rights of individuals. They recognized and acknowledged as self-evident the truth that all men are created equal, already endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Government was instituted among and by them to secure the rights they already had, a government which itself derives its powers from the consent of the governed.

3. Consequently, whether or not a person has a right to marry someone of the same sex—or their sibling, parent, pet goat, self, etc.—is not an issue the government can answer (in the United States), because the government is not the source of rights. Since marriage is a covenant instituted by God, it is one of the rights we are endowed with; therefore, our Creator is the source to which we must go to find out whether or not marriage includes people of the same sex. The U.S. government protects rights; it neither grants them nor has any authority over them.

I also chimed in a few times on this topic in the comments section. At one point Duane compares gay marriage to a man marrying a dog. Awesome conclusions those guys reach.