Marriage an individual right, not debate for public eye

Last week’s Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage hasn’t changed anyone’s way of thinking.

The religious right still believes marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Trumpeters of equal rights still believe gay couples deserve to be treated the same as heterosexual couples.

The only thing that changed is the law, which no longer bans same-sex couples from receiving government’s endorsement of their union.

But maybe this emotional issue will ultimately spur a more worthwhile initiative — one in which individual liberty trumps majority rule.

Maybe now that conservative Bible believers are losing their “majority” status in the court and in the public square as well, they will begin to embrace efforts by libertarians and others: Get government out of the bedroom and a lot of other places where it does not belong.

Exactly how did government get involved in the marriage business anyway?

Government-endorsed marriage is just a funding mechanism and a tool for election campaigns.

What religious affiliation ties a marriage ceremony to financial incentives or popularity?

Marriage is an individual right, not a topic for public debate with standards determined by registered voters who choose to participate.

Those who claim we should have a “Christian” government should note there are plenty of Christians who support same-sex marriage and abhor discrimination in any form. That will only lead to a government definition for “Christian.” Yeah ... one more distraction, so it won’t have to figure out how to secure the blessings of liberty, one of the few items in government’s job description.

We can debate all day whether God condones gay marriage. But the real question is whether government should be allowed to weigh in — or whether individuals should decide for themselves.