If we examine virtually any controversial political issue, we often find that we are presented with false alternatives. This fallacy consists of asserting that we must choose between a limited number of alternatives when other, unmentioned alternatives exist.
As an example, when a Christian baker refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding, and the couple sued. Christians shouted that religious liberties were being violated, while gays argued that their civil rights were being violated. And so, we were presented with the false alternative between “religious rights” and “gay rights.”
When an issue is presented this way, someone’s “rights” must inevitably be violated. We must choose between “religious rights” or “gay rights.” But this is a false alternative because another alternative exists. In fact, the alternatives presented aren’t even real alternatives.
If the issue is viewed from the perspective of individual rights the controversy and dilemma disappear. Individuals rights, including property rights, protect our freedom to act as we judge best in the pursuit of the values that we think will bring us joy and happiness–to enable us to flourish. There are no such things as “religious rights” or “gay rights.” There are only individual rights, and they apply to all individuals—Christians and atheists, gays and heterosexuals, men and women, blacks and whites.
Property rights protect the freedom of individuals to create, use, and trade material values on whatever terms they choose. At the same time, the rights of other individuals protect their freedom to trade on terms that they find acceptable. In other words, individual rights, including property rights, protect the freedom of individuals to voluntarily engage in trades that are mutually acceptable, as well as abstain from trades for any reason they choose.
The real alternative of individual rights eliminates the false choice between “religious rights” and “gay rights.” It provides a real alternative in which everyone’s rights are respected and protected. But when we are presented only with false alternatives, we are faced with a seemingly irreconcilable conflict. Read Part 2 of this series.