:: 5 Works Cited
2340 words (6.7 double-spaced pages)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Every little girl dreams of her wedding day, and many can even be seen dressing
up, putting pillow cases on their heads and pretending that they are actually walking
down that long aisle towards the one they love. As these little girls grow up, some of
them, as well as some little boys . who may not play dress up, but have equal aspirations
of marriage when they grow up . will be faced with the harsh reality that this illustrious
day may never come to pass for them. The reason is not that they will be unable to find
someone with whom they want to spend their lives, but that whom they have chosen is
unacceptable to society because they happen to be of the same sex. Evidence today shows
that homosexuality is not a choice, but is predetermined before birth (McClory 3).
Therefore, these boys and girls will not choose a difficult path but will have no other
choice, in adulthood, but to seek marriage to someone of the same sex, if they wish to be
married at all. Homosexual couples should have the same rights and freedoms as
heterosexual couples and, therefore, same-sex marriage should be legalized in the United
States of America.
The U.S. Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to "life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness." All U.S. citizens have the civil right to marry . all except
homosexuals. The government only has three criteria that dictate those who may not
marry. These criteria specify that one may not marry another family member, may only
marry one person, and may not marry someone of the same sex. By denying same-sex
marriages, the government is denying homosexuals equal civil rights. Several state court
decisions have come to this conclusion, including Hawaii, Massachusetts, Vermont and
Alaska (Sullivan 86). These states have interpreted their state constitutions, and
subsequently granted various rights to same-sex couples, ranging from civil unions to
marriage (Sullivan 86-87). When states truly examine their constitutions, they are forced
to realize that the denial of marriage, or a similar institution, is unconstitutional. The U.S.
government would be forced to come to the same conclusion, if they impartially reviewed
the U.S. Constitution.
The denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples can be compared to the denial of
interracial marriages in past decades. Until 1968, interr...
... middle of paper ...
...ed, due to the separation of
church and state in the United States. The discrimination against homosexuals, which
keeps same-sex unions illegal and prevents homosexuals from receiving many of the
benefits associated with heterosexual marriage, must stop. Hopefully, one day we, as a
nation, will be able to look back with disbelief at a time when same-sex marriage was
illegal, in the same way that we now look back at the previous legality of slavery with
horror and disbelief.
"Clash over Gay Marriage." Christian Century. Dec 18, 1996.
Day-O'Connor, Sandra. "Turner v. Safely." Same Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. Ed.
Andrew Sullivan 2nd ed. New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 95-96.
Graff, E.J. "Retying the Knot." Same Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. Ed. Andrew Sullivan.
2nd ed. New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 135-138.
McClory, Robert J. "A Religious, Civil Hornet's Nest." National Catholic Reporter.
August 15, 2003.
Nagourney, Eric. "Study Finds Families Bypassing Marriage". New York Times. New
York, NY: February 15, 2000.
Sullivan, Andrew, ed. Same Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. 2nd ed. New York: Vintage
Books, 2004. XXIII . XXVIII.
Click the button above to view the complete essay, speech, term paper, or research paper