Gay Rights Movement: The New Anti-Prohibition Movement

Some gay rights advocates have heralded their movement as similar to the civil rights movement. I have voiced my disagreement to that comparison, but I do not deny that they have faced discrimination (just to a lesser degree).

Now this does not mean that I do not believe that there is no place for the discussion and legalization of same-sex marriage, but it does mean that I take a different perspective on the two sides of the argument. I think the gay rights movement is more like the anti-prohibition movement. To compare, we will start at the point of time when the prohibition was enacted through the 18th amendment and it is illegal for the sale and consumption of alcohol (for the sole purpose that gay marriage was not legal before the movement began).

In this time period, there were groups of people who wanted to maintain the prohibition, keeping alcohol illegal, because alcohol was immoral and harmed society (who can blame them if you have ever seen alcohol destroy individuals and families by alcoholism). The group that wanted to repeal the prohibition felt that alcohol was an important part of their liberty and pursuit of happiness (many use alcohol in responsible ways and find it an essential part of plans with friends).

To me, this sounds exactly like the gay rights movement. Religious people believe that gay marriage will hurt society, based on faith and testimonials of children raised by gay couples. Whereas homosexuals who want to marry and people who support them believe that being able to marry is an essential part of their pursuit of happiness. Neither side is wrong, but they each point out a specific responsibility of the American government: to protect citizens and to protect the right of citizens to pursue happiness.

This is why it is a reasonable solution to leave it to the states to decide, whether by just state laws or eventually an amendment that is passed by the people (like the anti-prohibition people got the 21st amendment passed). The Supreme Court jumped its bounds when it required states to not only recognize marriages performed in other states (as is reasonable) but to 'legislate' that states must perform same-sex marriages. Their duty is to check up on the laws not create laws. Regardless of the fact that the Supreme Court got carried away, it does not mean that everyone else should get carried away.

The right to marry is not a right protected by the constitution (as some supreme court justices tried to imply), as polygamy and marriages of children under certain ages are not allowed. But, as more and more Americans feel that gays deserve to marry, it can become something that we chose to include via an amendment. But, just as the enactment of the 21st amendment didn't require all establishments that provided food to also sell alcohol, the 'legalization' of same-sex marriage should not force all institutions that perform weddings to provide this service for same-sex couples. Will most institutions eventually perform those types of weddings? Most likely because that is the financially savvy decision.

Is this discriminatory? Not in my opinion. Many Catholic Churches will not permit me to marry inside their churches unless I convert to Catholicism. My Church requires people to not only be members but members who live high standards of worthiness to marry in our temples. The reason Catholics and Latter-day Saints do this is because of their beliefs related to marriage. Similarly, some churches still preach that life is better without alcohol, mine included. The 21st amendment didn't come and tell us that we had to stop considering drinking alcohol a sin or force us to sell alcohol on church property. It permits us to choose.

America was founded on the principles of religious freedom because people were tired of government forcing everyone to belong to the state religion and showing legal preference to one religion or another. Religious freedom is what we would lose if churches would be forced to perform marriages against their beliefs. It is because of this freedom that homosexuals were even able to voice their dissenting belief on marriage and relationships (i.e. no one forced them to believe homosexuality is a sin). Liberty is at its finest is when we live in a community in peace even when we believe different things and live according to those beliefs. 

Gay Rights Movement vs. Civil Rights Movement

Some gay rights advocates have heralded their movement as similar to the civil rights movement. I feel like this is an insult to the civil rights movement. I know, the person who just stood up for the confederate flag as not a symbol of racism is calling the gay rights advocates worse of an insult to the civil rights movement than the confederate flag. But hear me out as to why it is more like the anti-prohibition movement.

As I discussed in my last post, slavery was a horrible and even the North winning the civil war did little to change the perspective of white supremacists as to the fact that blacks were human too and deserved to be treated as such. The civil rights movement was getting the rights for blacks that they were legally given with the 15th amendment. At that point, blacks were not allowed to occupy the same public space as white people in many places, had to go to inferior schools, and were not permitted to vote even though they were permitted legally.

None of this is something that gays go through. I attend school and did attend school with homosexuals, homosexuals can vote and do vote, and I have seen gay couples in the same public places as heterosexuals. This is why I think it is an insult to the blacks' struggle. It is true that there have been instances of discrimination of individuals and businesses that are debatable as to treating everyone equal, but that pales in comparison to what the blacks faced. In fact, I doubt there has been any group in the United States of America whose individuals have not faced some form of discrimination similar to what homosexuals have faced as individuals.

Now this does not mean that I do not believe that there is no place for the discussion and legalization of same-sex marriage, but it does mean that I take a different perspective on the two sides of the argument. This is a lead in for my next (formerly previous) post about how the gay rights movement is more like the anti-prohibition movement.

What the Confederate Flag means to me

There has been a movement towards taking down the Confederate Flag among the South because someone posed in pictures with the confederate flag before committing a hate crime. (Imagine if people were taking down crosses because he was holding a cross in his hand while committing the hate crime) If this does not seem like a foolish enough of a reason to ban something, I would like to share what the confederate flag represents to me.

In the 1800's before the civil war, teachers usually point to the conditions of slavery in the south and condemn the plantation owners as inhumane. Then when we get to the early 1900's with the rise of regulation in factories to protect workers and vaguely go over how these regulations made life better for workers today. As far as I am concerned, nobody points out that life as a factory worker was not very different from being a slave in terms of treatment and living conditions.

This is an important fact to point out because the South seceded from the union when it felt like it had been unjustly served by other states and the federal government in retaining its rights as a state. It is true that it was related to the North trying to abolish slavery, but it is important to note that it was showing that states have the power to stand up to the federal government and other states when rights are infringed in similar ways as when the colonies were wronged by Great Britain before they became the United States of America.

The confederate flag is a symbol to me of the power of the people or states to stand up against federal government and other states when they work to infringe upon the rights of people and states. To me it represents the power of the people to stand up when their government created by the constitution no longer respects the rights that pulled us all together. This is a symbol borne by those who stand by the second amendment so that the people can be armed against their government when it ceases to serve its proper function. The confederate flag is a symbol that the government is responsible to the people for how it upholds its duties to preserve the liberties of the American people.

This is the reason why I think it is unwise to remove this symbol. As part of first amendment rights, I believe that it should hang as a reminder to government officials what they are really supposed to be doing. If it becomes illegal to sell or have the confederate flag it will be a horrible sign of tyranny against the people of the United State of America by its government.

The confederate flag has been used as a rally point for white supremacists as they try to restore the former status quo or as they plan hate crimes, but this does not mean that the confederate flag is a symbol of white supremacists or hate of colored people. Many groups rally under a benign symbol for hideous deeds, be it Crusades and the cross, radical Islam and the Koran, or violence against Christians churches and the rainbow flag. All of these are people using a positive symbol in a way to promote violence that is not represented by the symbol. The confederate flag is the same way. It is a symbol of people who are brave enough to stand up against powers that be when they stop upholding the purpose they were placed in that position of power.

The same goes for us today, as we look to the true meaning of symbols we can avoid discriminate against those who rally under them for non-violent reasons. I stand for the right of persons and governments to display the confederate flag. I hope it will be permitted to continue to wave across the nation as a symbol against tyranny from the federal government.