TOTALLY GEEKED!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
totallygeeked -> totallygeeked general -> Rand Paul supports individual rights – not gay rights – and the distinction is important
Post Info TOPIC: Rand Paul supports individual rights – not gay rights – and the distinction is important
Lady Gaga Snerd


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Rand Paul supports individual rights – not gay rights – and the distinction is important
Permalink  
 

Rand Paul supports individual rights – not gay rights – and the distinction is important

Nick Morpus

Nick Morpus, Rare Contributor

Posted on March 31, 2015 3:44 pm

 

SHARE THIS STORY

 
Print Friendly
  • Screen Shot 2015-03-31 at 3.39.37 PM
Gage Skidmore

 

Buzzfeed published a story today proclaiming “Rand Paul said he doesn’t believe in the concept of gay rights.”

At first glance, the headline would understandably seem inflammatory to many. But how fair is it?

Many libertarians believe in the fundamental principle that rights aren’t inherent to one’s lifestyle, skin color, gender, or class, but rather the simple fact that we are all individuals. Senator Paul told a reporter in a 2013 interview that he does not believe in rights based on one’s behavior.

“I am for equal rights for individuals, but I am not for judging individuals based on their behavior.

I don’t think I’ve ever used the word gay rights, because I don’t really believe in rights based on your behavior.”

This was a bedrock principle of his father, former Congressman Ron Paul. When asked what he thought about granting rights to specific groups such as gay people, women, or minorities, he would always answer that these separations take away from what is most important—the primacy of the rights of the individual no matter their differences.

These rights are meant to be broad and blind, and extend to each individual regardless of their particular group. When asked about the senator’s comments in the 2013 interview, Eleanor May, spokeswoman of Paul’s 2016 senate reelection campaign gave Buzzfeed a similar answer.

“What he is saying in this video is that he does not classify rights based on behavior, but rather recognizes rights for all, as our Constitution defines it.

Sen. Paul is the biggest proponent for protecting the Bill of Rights, which, as you know, protects the rights of all Americans as stated in our Constitution.”

Today, it is very easy for many of us who believe in liberty to fall into the trap of separating rights into smaller groups based on specific characteristics, which inevitably creates more problems than it solves.

This is the point that both Paul’s have worked to convey. It is also a point very easy to miss, or misunderstand, in a quick read of today’s Buzzfeed headline.

 

http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-supports-individual-rights-not-gay-rights-and-the-distinction-is-important/



__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/
ed11563


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

I can't decide whether to cheer or be afraid.

 



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.
burns07


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1586
Date:
Permalink  
 


he is merely paraphrasing the fundamental principle of libertarianism: " the right not to be aggressed against " for ALL individuals

you can't specify rights for one class of individuals without, in most cases, limiting the rights of other classes

nothing to be afraid of


__________________

" the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. "--edmund burke

 
I know what to do_sometimes


Frozen Sucks!

Status: Offline
Posts: 24384
Date:
Permalink  
 

I think this is a good thing and a concept that is need to be pointed out. It isn't about gay, black, white, Christain, Jew, etc rights, it is about individual rights.

__________________

Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.

Frozen is the bestest movie ever, NOT!
Ilumine


Regular

Status: Offline
Posts: 332
Date:
Permalink  
 

I firmly believe that we need INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, not SPECIFIC GROUP RIGHTS. And once we, as a society, switch that view/perception, we will have a much easier time with tolerance. Us against Them goes away when everyone is US and there isn't a THEM.

Which is why I have always been behind Civil Unions for EVERYONE and leaving the "marriages" up to the individual religious sect.

__________________
“One day, you will be old enough to start reading fairytales again.” C.S.Lewis
Lady Gaga Snerd


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

Yes, human rights. Not "rights" for this group, that group, etc.

__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/
Vette


Owl drink to that!

Status: Offline
Posts: 4799
Date:
Permalink  
 

I can't help but wonder, what would the term be for civil unions? For example, right now couples say "we are married." would they then say "we are civilly unioned?"

__________________

Was it a bad day?

Or was it a bad five minutes that you milked all day?
lilyofcourse


My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Status: Offline
Posts: 38325
Date:
Permalink  
 

VetteGirl wrote:

I can't help but wonder, what would the term be for civil unions? For example, right now couples say "we are married." would they then say "we are civilly unioned?"

 Under contract? 

 

Seriously though. We have individual rights. It's called the Bill of Rights. 

 



__________________

A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.

Charley Harper
cadiver


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 649
Date:
Permalink  
 

lilyofcourse wrote:
VetteGirl wrote:

I can't help but wonder, what would the term be for civil unions? For example, right now couples say "we are married." would they then say "we are civilly unioned?"

 Under contract? 

 

Seriously though. We have individual rights. It's called the Bill of Rights. 

 

 but the Bill of rights is still based on groups or classes.



__________________

 
cadiver


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 649
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ilumine wrote:

I firmly believe that we need INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, not SPECIFIC GROUP RIGHTS. And once we, as a society, switch that view/perception, we will have a much easier time with tolerance. Us against Them goes away when everyone is US and there isn't a THEM.

Which is why I have always been behind Civil Unions for EVERYONE and leaving the "marriages" up to the individual religious sect.

 The problem with states deciding civil unions then federal laws based on marriage would still not apply.  If the federal law then changes you would still have a problem with other countries' laws that are based on being married not a civil union. 



__________________

 
Ohfour


Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

cadiver wrote:
Ilumine wrote:

I firmly believe that we need INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, not SPECIFIC GROUP RIGHTS. And once we, as a society, switch that view/perception, we will have a much easier time with tolerance. Us against Them goes away when everyone is US and there isn't a THEM.

Which is why I have always been behind Civil Unions for EVERYONE and leaving the "marriages" up to the individual religious sect.

 The problem with states deciding civil unions then federal laws based on marriage would still not apply.  If the federal law then changes you would still have a problem with other countries' laws that are based on being married not a civil union. 

EXCELLENT POINT!!!!   



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...
ed11563


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

The problem I have with what he's saying is that, in the past,

every time someone's said anything like this, it's been a way to deny or

take away hard-earned gains from one or more minorities.

 

I've heard plenty of politicians say things that sound great ...

only to find out later that "The Devil is in the details"

and their great ideas are really covering up greed and corruption, and

crushing minorities.

 

 



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.
Lady Gaga Snerd


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

I could get behind Rand Paul. I like him.

__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
totallygeeked -> totallygeeked general -> Rand Paul supports individual rights – not gay rights – and the distinction is important


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard