Touchy Subjects - Love and Marriage

Love is passion.  When you have true passion, whether it's towards another person or a craft, hobby, pet, or anything else at all, you are practicing the highest form of freedom.  To fully embrace someone or something as part of yourself is something that cannot be defined or codified by any other entity or group of people.  It is something deeply personal and deeply unique to every individual.   It's certainly  not about special holidays, fancy dinners, jewelry or hallmark cards, though those may be very legitimate ways to express one's love towards another.  To have true love is to have true passion, and to have true passion in life is the ultimate expression of individual freedom.You'll often hear me say that the State (for these purposes defined as any level of government be it local, State, or Federal) is anathema to freedom.  When the State gets involved in something, even with the best intentions, you can bet that someone's freedom will be infringed upon.  The same holds true when the State tries to get involved with love.  Why we associate the two is something I've long been baffled by.  But for whatever variety of reasons we have largely come to accept the State's role in our love lives through the licensing of marriage.  For many, marriage is the ultimate expression of love.  For some, it is a personal symbol confirming mutual love for one another.  For others, marriage carries a more religious or spiritual meaning.  But regardless of the motive, most would agree that that the decisions to marry is a deeply personal one.In the past few years there has been much controversy in my adopted home State of California regarding marriage, or more specifically "gay" marriage.  The controversy surrounds "Prop 8", a ballot proposition that passed in 2008 which overturned a previous California court ruling allowing marriage between members of the same sex in the state by defining marriage as specifically between a man and a woman.  The passage of this Proposition sparked a lot of outrage not just in California but across the nation for many who feel gay people should have the same marriage "rights" as straight people, but the voters had spoken. That is the nature of democracy after all, isn't it?Of course, things aren't so simple in our Bizarro Democracy, where crazy voting blocs and judges seem to be the ones deciding the most personal issues of our lives.  Prop 8 has since been debated in multiple court cases, recently coming to a head with a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling the law unconstitutional, essentially overturning Prop 8 and legalizing gay marriage in California.  Many of the pro-gay marriage crowd have rejoiced, but the battle is not over.  It is very likely this case will go all the way to the Supreme Court, and essentially decide this issue for the entire nation.Here is the basic problem of allowing the State to be involved in the most personal decisions in our lives. When it's all said and done, 9 men and women in black robes that nobody ever voted for are going to decide for an entire country of 50 states, multiple territories and over 300 million people, who can marry who.  Many who call for democracy are the same who were appalled that the voters passed Prop 8 in the first place, and protested this decision.  But how can we have it both ways? How can we have a democracy where people can freely participate and yet still protect the individual rights of the people? The only solution is to drastically change the way we view the role of government - and to drastically reduce it.I will never quite understand the zealousness of those who would go out of their way to craft laws to define marriage one way or another for other people.  I don't care if two men want to marry each other, I don't care if a man and a woman want to marry each other, or even if 3 men and 2 women want to marry each other.  Whatever!  But even if I did care, I shouldn't be able to impose my view on others.  By the same token, businesses and churches should not be forced to accept a definition of marriage that they disagree with.  This is why government should be out of the marriage "business" all together.  For thousands of years, marriage was seen as a religious or personal institution, yet we've now come to accept government involvement at all levels.  In the early twentieth century, marriage license were often used to restrict whites from marrying blacks or other races in many states, much like Prop 8 was used to restrict gays from marrying each other in California over 100 years later.I know that the issues of marriage are more complicated due to all of the legal issues involved regarding next of kin, power of attorney, etc.  Again, this is the entire problem with the State being involved in the process! Legal issues should be determined completely separately from the personal issue of love and marriage, and all legal issues can be decided privately via contracts or via arbitration.  But when one gets a marriage "license", one is not just signing a contract with their partner. They are signing a three way contract between themselves, their partner, and the State.  And once the State is involved, you need the State's permission for everything...and that means bowing to the whims of those crazy voting blocks and old folks in black robes.Love. Have passion. Express it in whatever ways your inner spirit demands it.  But if we value our freedom and individual liberty, we won't lobby for "gay" marriage, "straight" marriage or any other state-sponsored approval or disapproval - we will simply lobby for freedom.And yes, in case you were wondering, I wrote this entire article as an excuse to post this:Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!