The gay rights movement, like the civil rights movement, has advocated a mixture of positive and negative rights. In recent years, we have seen gay activists emphasize inclusion in state institutions like the military and state sanction of gay marriage. Now, even on the marriage question, I personally take the Stephan Kinsella position, but I recognize that questions of state enfranchisement are complicated by the mere existence of the state, which makes it difficult to come to conclusions strictly on libertarian grounds. On special privileges and anti-discrimination laws, I of course oppose them for anyone.

But forty years ago, when homosexuality was much more directly persecuted by the state, when private property owners were not allowed to cater to willing customers on account of their sexual preferences, this violation of the rights of homosexuals and others to engage in free commerce and to associate freely culminated in the Stonewall Riots in New York. Activists fought back against police brutality and efforts of the political class to attack their liberties in a most intolerable manner.

This was, in the main, a heroic uprising, as far as I’m concerned, although I could of course not condone any “collateral damage” of non-aggressors if there was indeed any. It is ironic that this great historical example of gay rights activism firmly rooted in anti-state, pro-property rights principles is now being celebrated by a White House that doesn’t seem to care too much about either.