On orientation, choice, nature, same-sex marriage and government

Recently Cynthia Nixon (star of various TV, movie and stage productions including Sex and the City) made some remarks about being gay or straight and the question of if it was was choice or not. Nixon said that her current situation in a gay relationship was a choice. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/magazine/cynthia-nixon-wit.html


Instead of the question of whether being gay a choice or are people born with a specific orientation; I want to focus on a higher order question: what does it matter in the same-sex marriage discussion?

It is probably worth noting that given the extent of human variation in so many areas there is likely no single answer. It is an interesting question to help understand humans just as understanding being introvert or extrovert. But it touches the issue of how are lesbians and gay persons are treated socially and legally in our society and the history related to that is very sad. One of the ways that people fought for same-sex marriage was to compare sexual orientation to race and claim that the same logic that defeated the legal restrictions on inter-racial marriage meant that legal restrictions on same-sex marriage should also be eliminated. However if sexual orientation is a choice is this argument still valid?

I think that is the wrong question. The proper question is should the government be involved with same-sex marriage one way or the other? The answer is No. What we need is to get the government out of marriage; same-sex, opposite-sex or whatever. I wrote about this a couple of years ago http://www.alf.org/marriagemoulton.php

Loving Photos

In 1967 the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) had the case of Loving versus the state of Virginia concerning the Virginia anti-miscegenation law. The SCOTUS ruling that the law was unconstitutional was important because Richard Perry Loving and Mildred Loving faced prison time which would have been bad both for them as well as their children. I almost left off the prior sentences because I assumed that everyone would know about the Loving case however I decided to include just in case someone had forgotten. Now to the point of this post; you can see an interesting set of photos about the Loving family at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2088040/Photographs-Lovings-interracial-marriage-time-banned-16-states.html
based on the exhibit at the International Center of Photography http://www.icp.org/

This is just one more reminder about why the government needs to stop defining marriage and since I have written on this elsewhere I will just provide a link:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160321064725/http://www.alf.org/marriagemoulton.php

And this should serve as a cautionary reminder that the misguided opinion that in the hierarchy of government (city, county, state/provincial, federal) that individual liberty is necessary better served at a lower level. This opinion is demonstrably false. The situation is complex and nuanced which makes simplistic formulas and slogans not only inaccurate but detrimental to the quest for liberty.

So take a look at the photos for a visual reminder of a historic case.

Concerning SOPA and PIPA

Today is January 19, 2012 and a lot of blogs are either providing information about SOPA and PIPA or going black.  I have decided that the best approach for this small blog is to go the informational route.

There are several good informational sources such as https://www.eff.org/.

I have already contacted the Congressperson from the Congressional district in which I reside as well as both Senators.  If you do not know the names and contact info for these persons you can find assistance at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CongressLookup.

Hopefully SOPA and PIPA will be stopped.