UKIP
and the Gay Pride March
Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance
(18th June 2015)
Permission give to quote or republish in full
Contact details at foot of this e-mail
Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance
(18th June 2015)
Permission give to quote or republish in full
Contact details at foot of this e-mail
On the 6th June 2015, the
organisers of the Gay Pride March in London announced
that they had rejected an application from the UK Independence Party to take
part. They had given in to a petition which called UKIP “inherently homophobic,
transphobic, xenophobic, racist and misogynistic.”
Before making my statement
on this ban, I will say the following:
1. I am not, nor ever have
been a member of UKIP, and I voted Conservative in last month’s general
election.
2. I started denouncing the
laws against all-male sex in the 1970s – that is, before many of our leading
“gay rights” activists had started filling their nappies. Some of these
denunciations were in writing, and enough of them survive and can be found on my
website
to show that I am telling the truth. I will add that saying what I said as a
schoolboy and as a young man could get more than funny looks. It never did in my
case, but there was always a risk, and I took that risk.
3. So far as I am
concerned, the meaning of “gay rights” begins and ends with the right to do with
your own as you please, and to associate as you please with other consenting
adults. This means no criminal laws against all-male sex, and no discrimination
by the State. It also means no special laws against all-male erotica and no
special laws to protect “public decency.” Since I do not believe in general laws
against adult erotica, and believe that the old laws against causing a breach of
the peace are all that is needed for the regulation of public behaviour, what I
mean is complete freedom of speech and a relaxed view of what should be
tolerated in the streets.
4. I have no principled
objection to gay marriage. I wrote in its favour in the 1980s, and still see no
reason why the bundle of declarations and agreements that constitute marriage
should not be available to all who want it.
Now this, broadly speaking,
seems to be the position taken by my gay friends in UKIP. It seems also largely
to be the position taken in public by Nigel Farage. By the standards of twenty
five years ago, the UKIP line on gay issues is outrageously libertarian. Why ban
its representatives from joining in a gay march?
The answer, I regret, is
that the gay movement is no longer about the basic human rights recognised in
the English liberal tradition. It is about sectional privilege – privilege that
can only be granted and maintained by an enlarged and intrusive state. UKIP and
Nigel Farage are condemned because they are against anti-discrimination laws.
Their position on these is called “bigotry.”
However, part of the right
of association is the right not to associate. Two men should certainly
have the right to live together in matrimony. But no one should be forced to
bake their wedding cake. If you are running a business, you are risking your
money and your time. If you do not wish to do business with people, for whatever
reason, that should be your unquestioned right. It may be unwise of you to turn
away paying business. It may be small-minded of you. But that should be your
right. It is a right of exactly the same kind as the right of two men to have
sex with each other.
If you are a minister of
religion, you should not be compelled to solemnise a gay marriage. Or, if you do
solemnise a gay marriage against the rules of your denomination, you should have
no right to any legal redress if you are suspended from or deprived of your
position. A religion is a private organisation, formally or effectively separate
from the British State. The British State has no right to interfere in its
internal affairs, unless these are actively hostile to the lives, liberties or
property of others.
Freedom of speech involves
the right to publish and to consume erotica. It also involves the right to
express disgust for the acts portrayed, and to speak ill of anyone who enjoys
them. None of this involves the right to cause a breach of the peace, as
traditionally known. But no one should suffer any punishment for speaking out
for or against any particular sexual act or any particular lifestyle.
As an aide, let me deal
with the claim that UKIP is a “racist” and a “xenophobic” organisation. I do not
believe this to be true. But, if true, it is irrelevant. Disliking men whose
taste is for all-male sex and disliking foreigners may be equally uncharitable.
But they are logically separate. You can oppose mass-immigration on the grounds
that it displaces the traditional occupiers of a territory. This has no
automatic bearing on how those traditional occupiers should be allowed to
behave. And the distinction is not abstract. I know identitarians who are
strongly opposed to third world immigration and multiculturalism, but who are
indifferent to all-male sex.
I might add that many of
the newcomers are not indifferent to all-male sex, and that the areas
in which they predominate can be rather unfriendly to men whose taste is for
all-male sex.
Of course, Gay Pride is a
private organisation, and it has the same right as a Christian baker should have
not to associate with people it dislikes. But, I repeat, it is generally the
case that the mainstream gay movement in this country has moved away from the
liberal fundamentals that it preached from the 1950s until the 1990s. It has
become an increasingly sinister interest group pushing for censorship and
coerced association. When not able to use the criminal and civil laws to this
effect, it has demanded and obtained equally effective administrative
policies.
This change of nature is
wrong in itself. It is also against the long term interests of its alleged
beneficiaries. All the freedoms we presently enjoy are the fruits of the English
liberal tradition. Every denial of those fruits to some lay down a precedent for
their denial to others. For the past generation, the old prejudices against
all-male sex have been dissolving. Who can say what the next generation will
bring?
--
Sean Gabb
Director
The Libertarian Alliance (Recognised by HMRC as an educational charity for tax purposes) sean@libertarian.
Sean Gabb
Director
The Libertarian Alliance (Recognised by HMRC as an educational charity for tax purposes) sean@libertarian.