Do Gays Deserve Special Rights? A Libertarian Perspective on Anti-Discrimination Laws

Do gays deserve special rights to be protected in unique ways by society? It’s a loaded question, and it touches on the heart of freedom, equality, and the role of government in our lives. As a libertarian, my answer is simple: No group deserves any more or less rights than another.

If we’re striving for equality, then it must be genuine equality—not the kind that grants privileges to one group while imposing restrictions on another. It’s about preserving individual liberty, not manufacturing fairness through government mandates.

Rights vs. Privileges: The Libertarian Standpoint

In a truly free society, rights are universal. They belong to every human, regardless of race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation. But here’s the catch: when we begin to legislate special protections for specific groups, we cross the line from equal rights to privileged treatment.

I’m not protected because I’m heterosexual. There’s no law that grants me special status or safeguards my identity. And that’s how it should be. My rights come from my humanity, not from my sexual orientation.

The argument for special protections for LGBTQ+ individuals hinges on the idea of preventing discrimination. But let’s be honest—anti-discrimination laws don’t change hearts and minds; they merely regulate behavior. Worse, they often backfire, creating resentment and unintended consequences.

The Free Market is the Ultimate Equalizer

Take a look at the free market. It doesn’t care about your sexual orientation, skin color, or religion. It cares about value. If you can provide a product or service that people want, you succeed. If you can’t, you don’t. It’s as simple as that.

Consider this: if a business discriminates against gay people, they’re shooting themselves in the foot. They’re turning away potential customers, talented employees, and valuable contributions to their own success. In a competitive market, discrimination is bad for business.

Let the free market punish discrimination, not the government. Consumers have the power to boycott, protest, and choose where they spend their money. It’s a far more effective tool than government intervention, which often leads to unintended consequences.

Unintended Consequences of Anti-Discrimination Laws

Anti-discrimination laws are often well-intentioned but poorly executed. They create legal minefields for employers, forcing them to navigate complex regulations under the constant threat of lawsuits. And who suffers the most? The very people these laws are supposed to protect.

Here’s how it plays out: If hiring or firing someone from a protected class carries legal risks, some employers might avoid hiring them altogether. It’s not fair, but it’s reality. Why take the chance on a lawsuit when you can hire someone who doesn’t come with that risk?

Economist Thomas Sowell explained this perfectly. In discussing affirmative action, he noted that employers are more likely to hire those with proven track records to minimize legal liabilities. That means fewer opportunities for those trying to enter the workforce. It’s counterproductive.

The same logic applies to anti-discrimination laws for LGBTQ+ individuals. If a business owner is worried about being sued for discrimination, they might avoid hiring openly gay employees, just to be safe. The result? Fewer job opportunities for the very people these laws are meant to help.

Freedom of Association: A Fundamental Right

Libertarianism is rooted in individual liberty, and that includes the right to associate—or not associate—with whomever you choose. It’s not about endorsing discrimination; it’s about protecting freedom.

If we truly believe in equality, then we must accept that people have the right to make their own choices, even if we don’t agree with them. That includes the choice of a business owner to hire—or not hire—anyone they want.

This isn’t about being anti-gay or pro-discrimination. It’s about preserving freedom of association and preventing the government from overstepping its bounds.

The government has no right to dictate who you must associate with, who you must hire, or who you must serve. The moment it does, we’ve sacrificed liberty on the altar of political correctness.

Local vs. Statewide Legislation

In the video, the debate centers around a proposal for a statewide anti-discrimination law in Utah. Some argue that local ordinances aren’t enough and that a state mandate is necessary for consistent protection. But that’s a dangerous path.

Why should Salt Lake City’s values dictate the laws for the entire state? Utah is diverse, and different communities have different values. What works for one city might not work for another.

This is why libertarians advocate for localized governance. Let each community decide for itself. If Salt Lake City wants anti-discrimination laws, so be it. But don’t impose those laws on other cities with different cultural norms.

If Salt Lake City’s laws are truly better, other communities will follow naturally. That’s the beauty of the free market of ideas. Good ideas spread without government mandates.

The Hypocrisy of Special Rights

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: demanding special protections for one group inherently creates inequality. If gay people are given legal safeguards that others don’t have, then we’re no longer talking about equality—we’re talking about privilege.

What about other groups? Should Christians receive special protections in predominantly secular workplaces? Should conservatives receive special protections in liberal tech companies? Where does it end?

Equality means equal treatment under the law, not special privileges. The only fair solution is to protect individual rights, not group rights.

The Libertarian Solution: Individual Liberty and Free Markets

So, what’s the libertarian solution? It’s simple:

Protect individual rights, not group rights. Everyone should have the same freedoms and protections, regardless of identity.
Allow freedom of association. Let people make their own choices, even if we don’t agree with them.
Rely on the free market. Discrimination is bad for business. Let consumers and competition punish it naturally.
Localize governance. Let communities decide their own values without imposing one-size-fits-all mandates.

These principles don’t just protect liberty—they create a more inclusive society. A society where people succeed or fail based on their abilities, not on government mandates.

Final Thoughts: The True Meaning of Equality

Equality isn’t about granting special rights or privileges. It’s about ensuring that every individual has the same freedoms, the same opportunities, and the same protections under the law.

The government should protect our rights, not regulate our lives. It shouldn’t dictate who we hire, who we associate with, or how we run our businesses.

If we genuinely want equality, then we must embrace liberty. We must trust in the power of free markets, personal responsibility, and individual choice.

Freedom isn’t easy. It’s messy, it’s complicated, and it doesn’t guarantee fairness. But it’s the only path to genuine equality.

So, do gays deserve special rights? No. But they deserve the same rights as everyone else. No more, no less. That’s what liberty demands. And that’s the only way to achieve true equality.