17 May 2013

Anti-Discrimination Laws: Making Adultery a Constitutional Right

Anti-discrimination laws seem like a great idea, right? For example, in many jurisdictions it is unlawful to discriminate based on marital status. So that way no employer can have a policy 'we don't hire married women' or 'we don't hire single women'. That's a good thing, right? Can't possibly have a down side.

Except it does. If the anti-discrimination law is very broad--- perhaps simply stating 'discrimination based on marital status shall be unlawful', with no further clarifications and restrictions--- it can have many unintended effects.

For example, adultery. Adultery is a destructive force, the cause of divorces and violence. But with a broad anti-discrimination law, a motel owner may not refuse to rent a room to a married man and his mistress. That would be discriminating against the adulterer based on his marital status.

And what about an open, public adulterer who applies for a job at a family-oriented business? If he is turned down, he can claim discrimination based on his marital status, since being married is a prerequisite for adultery.

The laws against adultery serve an important purpose to society. Faithfulness in marriage makes marriages stronger and prevents divorce, which in turn reduces the risk of childhood poverty. Faithfulness reduces the spread of social diseases. Faithfulness in wives ensures that the children born to those wives are not the biological children of some outside lover, but of the husband. But sweeping anti-discrimination laws make it impossible to take note of the fact of adultery, and weakens the social sanctions against it.

This is why proposed anti-discrimination laws must be very specific, to ensure that no unintended effects will result.

How Do Families Benefit ME?

As a gay woman, I appreciate traditional families. I grew up in a traditional family. My parents' brothers and sisters founded traditional families. Traditional families make our society stronger, because they work better than any alternative so far devised.

The redefine-marriage thing really means that traditional marriage and the traditional family will be abolished in law and replaced by some government-approved alternative. But traditional marriage and families are so ingrained in every human culture that these attempts cannot succeed fully even if every nation were to turn fully totalitarian to be able to enforce the new marriage/family substitute.

I wrote this on my Facebook page and it was quoted in 'The Prosperous Pol VS the Gay Pauper'.  And so I decided to copy it here because I really should be blogging on my blog and not on my Facebook page. ;)