How the Instapundit sees things
Today, Instapundit tells those opposed to guns and to gay marriage "have much in common." I don't see it that way at all.
Two thousand years ago, Cicero scorned the Greeks for their widely accepted practice of homosexuality. Cicero taught us laws are based on customs, traditions, and natural rights.
David Hume argued against the "natural rights" basis of laws, for he granted laws could be as arbitrary and capricious as society chose to be.
Bentham told us he found his basis for his utilitarianism in Hume's reasoning. Hume also taught us, Reason would lead to conclusions that would destroy our reason -- we see that in Singer's belief that it should be acceptable to kill a child after birth, provided its death increases the overall good of the community.
Instapundit believes the opposition to guns and gay rights "have much in common." Are we to conclude the opposite is equally true, the support for these "rights" shares much in common? Indeed, this notion is odd.
Common sense tells me my right to own a gun is contained within my "natural right" to defend myself. Common sense tells us gay people cannot fulfill the "natural" desire of humans to "produce its own kind."
Gay couples cannot fulfill what Aristotle termed man's "divine" desire for immortality through progeny. Perhaps, we must allow them more rights than I have with my wife to satisfy this commonly shared desire.
I would agree that gay people desire to "marry" is more symbolic than practical. I disagree with his reasoning as it applies to gun ownership. For me, it seems his argument is flawed or poorly developed.
Until someone can tell me why in every gay couple I see or read about, why one person in that relationship always assumes the attributes or characteristics of the opposite gender, I will continue to reject the notion that gay rights are "natural rights." In this matter, Andrew Sullivan refuses to accept my challenge and convince me I am wrong or uninformed.
I am convinced by Hume's reasoning, for that seems to be the our societal progression; however, I hope and pray that Cicero is right regarding the basis for law.
Two thousand years ago, Cicero scorned the Greeks for their widely accepted practice of homosexuality. Cicero taught us laws are based on customs, traditions, and natural rights.
David Hume argued against the "natural rights" basis of laws, for he granted laws could be as arbitrary and capricious as society chose to be.
Bentham told us he found his basis for his utilitarianism in Hume's reasoning. Hume also taught us, Reason would lead to conclusions that would destroy our reason -- we see that in Singer's belief that it should be acceptable to kill a child after birth, provided its death increases the overall good of the community.
Instapundit believes the opposition to guns and gay rights "have much in common." Are we to conclude the opposite is equally true, the support for these "rights" shares much in common? Indeed, this notion is odd.
Common sense tells me my right to own a gun is contained within my "natural right" to defend myself. Common sense tells us gay people cannot fulfill the "natural" desire of humans to "produce its own kind."
Gay couples cannot fulfill what Aristotle termed man's "divine" desire for immortality through progeny. Perhaps, we must allow them more rights than I have with my wife to satisfy this commonly shared desire.
I would agree that gay people desire to "marry" is more symbolic than practical. I disagree with his reasoning as it applies to gun ownership. For me, it seems his argument is flawed or poorly developed.
Until someone can tell me why in every gay couple I see or read about, why one person in that relationship always assumes the attributes or characteristics of the opposite gender, I will continue to reject the notion that gay rights are "natural rights." In this matter, Andrew Sullivan refuses to accept my challenge and convince me I am wrong or uninformed.
I am convinced by Hume's reasoning, for that seems to be the our societal progression; however, I hope and pray that Cicero is right regarding the basis for law.
posted by Tony Harrison at 4:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home