Blogs > Liberty and Power > Marriage Catch-22

Jun 30, 2008

Marriage Catch-22




[cross-posted at Austro-Athenian Empire]

A friend sends me a link to this story about several counties in California responding to the recent legalisation of same-sex marriage by refusing to perform any marriage ceremonies at all, whether same-sex or hetero. My friend asks whether this is a positive or negative development from a libertarian standpoint; although the motive may be homophobic, isn’t this policy a step in the right direction, i.e., toward getting the state out of the business of defining and regulating marriage, leaving it to private contract and custom?

Well, I think it’s a mixed bag. Recent events have actually gotten the separation of state and marriage onto the table in broader-than-libertarian circles, which is surely a good thing even if some of the motives are questionable. But under present circumstances, county governments refusing to perform marriages has a serious downside.

As things stand, the state imposes a variety of legal burdens on unmarried couples from which married couples are exempt; these range from higher taxes to restrictions on inheritance, refusal of right to make medical decisions on a partner’s behalf, and, in the case of citizen/alien couples, liability to deportation for the alien. In this context, when one branch of the state, charged with providing the only legal means of avoiding certain forms of aggression imposed by another branch of the state, refuses to provide those means, it arguably becomes an accessory to the aggression – while still collecting salary from the taxes of the victims, to boot. Now if county employees wish to resign their tax-funded jobs, that’s another matter. But in the meantime, it’s as though my henchman Sluggo says he’s going to rob you unless my other henchman Thuggo says not to, while Thuggo remains silent (and collects his share of the take).

Incidentally, another friend who’s doing academic research on marriage asks me for citations to articles (preferably though not necessarily in academic journals) by “prominent libertarians” who argue that the state should stay out of marriage. Any suggestions? (So far all my friend has found is Jennifer Roback Morse’s argument that a libertarian state should not permit divorce! For the honour of libertarianism we must do better.)



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Aeon J. Skoble - 7/2/2008

Oh. Hmm. No, I guess I haven't. I've given 2 or 3 talks on this, but can't recall publishing anything. Guess I'll have to remedy that...


Roderick T. Long - 7/1/2008

Thanks! You are certainly both sufficiently prominent. (But Aeon, have you actually written on this in an article or book?)


Roderick T. Long - 7/1/2008

Thanks!


Roderick T. Long - 7/1/2008

Thanks!


Roderick T. Long - 7/1/2008

Thanks!


Jeff Riggenbach - 7/1/2008

Chapter 15 of my book "In Praise of Decadence" (it was originally published, in slightly different form, under the title "Family Fever," in the June-July 1984 issue of Reason) might be relevant here - unless, of course, I'm not "prominent" enough.

JR


Aeon J. Skoble - 7/1/2008

I don't know how prominent you think I am, but I think (a) that the state should not be in the business of licensing marriages, but also (b) that as long as they are, they ought not to forbid same-sex or interracial couples from getting married. It's another example of the moral compromise forced on us by statism. Take voting: an anarcho-libertarian might advance an argument to the effect that voting in general is illegitimate, since it involves force etc. - but that doesn't mean that in the current world, the state should deny the vote to gays or blacks or women. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. If the state marries anyone, they can't exclude gay couples.


Russell Hanneken - 6/30/2008

And here's an opinion piece Wendy McElroy wrote for the Fox News web site:

"It's Time to Privatize Marriage"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57749,00.html


Russell Hanneken - 6/30/2008

David Boaz, who I would say qualifies as a prominent libertarian, argued for privatization of marriage back in 1997, in an article for Slate. You can read it here:

http://www.slate.com/id/2440/


Steven Horwitz - 6/30/2008

Well, when that chapter of my book is done, it will be a good reference. Alas, it is not yet done.

My working title is "Two Worlds at Once: A Classical Liberal Approach to the Evolution of the Modern Family." Consider it the libertarian anti-Morse.

I don't have any draft chapters up on the web, but there are two papers on my webpage that will give folks a flavor of things (last two):

http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~shorwitz/Papers/wpmain.htm

Readers can also check out these three published articles:

http://www.fee.org/pdf/the-freeman/July-Aug%2007%20Horwitz.pdf

http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/bei041?ijkey=mHm33v0YBFbIz6h&;keytype=ref

http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~shorwitz/Papers/JARS-Hayek.pdf