What’s new on the agenda is that PGCC (Persian Gulf Cooperation Council) has banned the entrance of homosexuals in their countries. Kuwait has built a ‘medical homosexual radar’ and is planning to test it and make routine examinations on the expatriates.
Banning the right of homosexuals to enter their countries is practically and theoretically and philosophically a utilitarian action. Since it argues and claims to be protecting the well-being of the majority, this limitation is not against Bentham’s utilitarianism. Bentham’s utilitarianism, which suggests the idea of ‘the greatest number of happiness for the greatest number of people’ does not contradict with this situation since the majority of the population in these countries agree with these laws and rules, being heterosexuals and thus simply unaffected by the restrictions.
Nozick brings forward his idea of a state and how it should be. He believes that the state should have no moral rules; indicating that there should be no laws or restrictions against the sexual intimacy of homosexuals. In Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Quatar, Oman, Kuwait and the Arab Emirates, homosexuality is banned by law. Also homosexuality has a death penalty in countries such as Sudan, Yemen, Mauritania and Saudi Arabia. Every aspect of this law and these restrictions are against Nozick’s point of view since it does not respect let alone defend the choices of the individual and it limits the individuals moral rights.
The prohibition of individual rights (no matter what the reason is), restricting the rights of the minorities for its own state of well-being, stands against the libertarian understanding. Philosophies have always culminated in politics, without ever giving the opportunity to scholars to discuss and formulate the results.