More strange bedfellows

[owlmoose]

Robert Levy of the Cato Institute signs on to co-chair the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the organization behind Perry vs. Schwarzenegger.

The Cato Institute. The Cato Institute. An ultra-conservative think tank stepping up to support the cause of same-sex marriage. This particular organization identifies as libertarian, so this isn't shocking on the level of, say, the Heritage Foundation or Focus on the Family getting involved on this side of the issue. (Or Ted Olsen. Oh, wait...) But other libertarian organizations haven't gotten involved en masse, and it really shows how the usual alliances have broken down in the face of the future.

In other news, gays marry in Iowa, Iowans shrug and move on to other things.

Hat tip to Shakesville for the links.

Comments

[delladella.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I've been waiting for so-called libertarians to get cracking on this issue. Anyone honestly afraid of government wouldn't want government touching marriage with a ten-foot pole, or at least that's been my thinking.

God, people are weird.

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

You'd think. But I've actually heard "libertarians" argue, with a straight face, that the government needs to stay out of marriage... by not extending it to same-sex couples. The mental gymnastics, they are mind-boggling.

[delladella.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes. I've heard that one before—from my own boyfriend, I'm embarrassed to admit. He identifies as a libertarian, and yet same-sex marriage and state-sanctioned torture are two issues we've gone round and round about to frustrating results.

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

I don't know if your boyfriend falls into this category, but I've found that this stripe of "libertarianism" tends to boil down to "don't make me pay taxes."

[delladella.livejournal.com]

He calls himself a libertarian, but he's a registered Republican and certainly a Republican in my eyes.

As expected, there's a general hatred of taxes underpinning his economic beliefs, though he's not so out there that he refuses to acknowledge he's been the beneficiary of taxes in terms of libraries, highways, and other public works.

I've even got him to admit he's wrong about same-sex marriage and torture, going solely by his own general principles, but how he'll act in the voting booth is anybody's guess. Like everyone else, he's an emotional voter.

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

Logic wins out! At least you've gotten him that far.

[oswulf.livejournal.com]

Yeh, I have trouble wrapping my mind around self-proclaimed libertarians supporting O'Rileyesque positions on war/surveillance/torture.

Personally, I think I really could get behind a truly "get the government out" approach to marriage though. Absolutely, let churches decide what marriages they will or won't recognize. (If the UMC splits so be it.) But to the extent that the government chooses to be involved in marriage or civil unions or whatever it does choose to recognize it really ought to be recognizing them equally.

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

I agree; religious marriage and legal unions should be totally different things, like they are in some European countries (the UK, for one). I don't know if it could ever happen here, though. Separation of church and state or no, our laws and traditions are too bound up in Christian customs.