Daniel Peterson wrote:
And here I thought I tended libertarian.
But what do I know? (I guess I need to do more research in Scartch's "dossiers" so that I can be better informed about my opinions.)
I suppose you're under the impression that, while the Taliban rejected gay marriage (a much discussed issue in Afghanistan since the 1980s), they insisted that homosexuals should enjoy basic human rights?
You're also a fan of Ann Coulter, who most libertarians in my experience would view as monstrous. I do and I'm a libertarian. Simply saying "I'm a libertarian" doesn't always clear things up. The
genuinely Taliban-esque Gary North is a self-described libertarian who holds influence among the "Lew Rockwell" libertarian crowd. He favors the death penalty for gays. There's lots of rather un-libertarian conservatives who call themselves libertarian for various reasons. Libertarians as a group tend to be socially liberal on gay rights. Yet, I think I would be mistaken to assume that's your view. While I think it is quite unlikely, and therefore a little ridiculous, to imply you are pro-Taliban when it comes to the gays, saying you tend libertarian is just not enough information in of itself.
All that said, I would think disallowing homosexuals from marrying each other for no good reason constitutes a violation of basic human rights. But if that doesn't float your boat, he also favors anti-sodomy laws. The main thing Card has on the Taliban is that he doesn't favor the death penalty for homosexual behavior, just lesser penalties.
So no, he does not favor basic human rights for homosexuals unless you carefully define "basic human rights" in a way that doesn't include rights Card does not think homosexuals should have. And if you do that, you can to the same when talking about the Taliban. They offered homosexuals basic human rights too. Only not.