For governments which are ostensibly there to safeguard our rights, our lives, and our property, they sure make quite the habit out of telling us what we explicitly cannot do with same. In Michigan, the debate is over same-sex benefits for public employees — which would include school teachers, university professors, police officers, firemen, and anyone else who’s employed on the public dime:
The implications of the 2004 marriage amendment to the Michigan constitution were argued for the first time before the state Supreme Court on Tuesday in a case involving the extension of health care benefits to the same sex partners of public employees. …
Lawyers representing the public agencies, Gov. Jennifer Granholmn, the ACLU and other gay rights groups said voters had not intended to bar benefits when they passed the so-called marriage amendment, but instead wanted to protect the institution of marriage at a time when same-sex unions were being sanctioned or endorsed in other parts of the country.
Fortunately, private employers are not affected by the amendment that proscribes the provision of benefits to same-sex couples.
Sure, you could probably try and make a rather weak argument that the State should have the power to limit the benefits it grants to those in its employ; after all, private companies are (for the time being) and ought to be able to offer or deny such benefits as they deem appropriate. But the fact of the matter is that the State is not a private company, and simply shouldn’t enjoy the same privileges – actually exercises of rights – to which a private company or individual is entitled. “States’ Rights” is a null concept, as only individuals can have or exercise rights. So the State cannot have the same “right” to do something which a private company or individual would, it can only exercise power in denial or affirmation of such rights.
A State which forbids the provision of same-sex benefits by private companies would be condemned for denying the rights of individuals. A State which forbids the provision of same-sex benefits to its own employees is only marginally less guilty of the same crime.
We need to start pushing the arguments that it’s wrong to deny a minority it’s fair and equal rights and point out why. Check out the website http://www.createdequal.us for helpful arguments and perspectives.
Agreed.
I’ll check out the link.
[...] a related follow-up to the piece I wrote earlier in the week about Michigan’s same-sex benefits debate, Congress has now approved a measure which would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. [...]