The exploration for gay marriages has been severe over time that it can only be liken to the movements that fought for civil right for the Americans long before the law stood in. It is sudden that in the quest for equal marriage rights, the gay rights activists happen to be few as they work their way out to the constitution. But their struggle is being supported by the public and bearing in mind that the political shift is also working to their advantage (Newton, 69-70). Despite the tireless effort of the equal rights activists, their opponents already happen to have support of the constitution and the big question remains to, when this will actually happen. This paper will be endeavoring at elucidating and giving further details in support of gay matrimony rights.
As from the year 1970, the deliberation on whether to accord individuals of the same biological sex the right t live together has never come into a concise conclusion. Up to latest, several countries have subscribed to the idea that same sex marriages should be authorized with the state of Massachusetts being the first one to enact the same in the year 2004. Several countries have also had a reason of joining the former states Connecticut, Vermont, and the New York subsequently joining the others in the same quest of the legalization of the same sex marriages (Newton, 69-70).
The defense of marriage act (DOMA), through the federal government has always rejected the gay marriages and presents that marriage is between one man and one woman. However before the enactment of this act, the privacy act regulated conception, procreation child bearing family relation and marriage. Having not specified the marriage parties, this could mean that the gay marriage was also p...
... middle of paper ...
... the need to be a homosexual is a natural thing thus these individuals should not be denied the right to marry, instead they ought to enjoy their marriage rights (Sullivan, 128-130). This has thus called upon the prohibition of the same sex marriage for amendments of the constitution so as to enable the gay enjoy their right of union.
Work Cited
Cahill, Sean. Same-sex Marriage in the United States: Focus on the Facts. Lanham [u.a.: Lexington Books, 2004. Print.
Eskridge, William N, and Darren R. Spedale. Gay Marriage: For Better or for Worse? : What We've Learned from the Evidence. Oxford [u.a.: Oxford Univ. Press, 2006. Print.
Newton, David E. Same-sex Marriage: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2010. Internet resource.
Sullivan, Andrew. Same-sex Marriage: Pro and Con : a Reader. New York: Vintage Books, 2004. Internet resource.
Wolf, Richard. “Timeline: Same-Sex marriage through the years.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 26 June 2015,
The constitutional right of gay marriage is a hot topic for debate in the United States. Currently, 37 states have legal gay marriage, while 13 states have banned gay marriage. The two essays, "What’s Wrong with Gay Marriage?" by Katha Pollitt and "Gay "Marriage": Societal Suicide" by Charles Colson provide a compare and contrast view of why gay marriage should be legal or not. Pollitt argues that gay marriage is a constitutional human right and that it should be legal, while Colson believes that gay marriage is sacrilegious act that should not be legal in the United States and that “it provides a backdrop for broken families and increases crime rates” (Colson, pg535). Both authors provide examples to support their thesis. Katha Pollitt provides more relevant data to support that gay marriage is a constitutional right and should be enacted as law in our entire country, she has a true libertarian mindset.
Soule, S. A. (2004). Going to the Chapel? Same Sex Marriage Bans in the United States. Social Problems, 453-477.
Gay marriage is a hotly debated issue in today's society. Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett offer opposing views in the June 3, 1996 edition of Newsweek. Sullivan's article, “Let Gays Marry,” offers several arguments supporting the issues of same sex marriage. Bennett counters in his article, “Leave Marriage Alone,” that same sex marriages would be damaging to the sanctity of marriage. Each author presents several reasons for the positions they defend and bring up valid points to defend their opinions. William Bennett and Andrew Sullivan share a mutual respect for the values and sacredness of the bond of marriage. Their disagreements stem from who they believe should be allowed to marry.
AFTER GAY MARRIAGE, what will become of marriage itself? Will same-sex matrimony extend marriage's stabilizing effects to homosexuals? Will gay marriage undermine family life? A lot is riding on the answers to these questions. But the media's reflexive labeling of doubts about gay marriage as homophobia has made it almost impossible to debate the social effects of this reform. Now with the Supreme Court's ringing affirmation of sexual liberty in Lawrence v. Texas, that debate is unavoidable.
Newton, D. E. (2010). Same-sex Marriage : A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Barclay, Scott and Shauna Fisher. "The States and the Differing Impetus for Diverging Paths on Same-Sex Marriage." Policy Studies Journal (2003): 3. eLibrary. Web. 27 Sept. 2013.
Wolfson, Evan. Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People's Right to Marry. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004. Print.
Stoddard, Thomas. “Gay Marriage: Make Them Legal”. Current Issues and Enduring Questions. Pages 31 – 52. Bedford Books. Boston. 1996
One of the most controversial issues around today is gay marriages. Many believe that the media is primly responsible for the idea of same-sex marriages, but when it all comes down to it there are really only two sides; those who support gay marriages, and those who oppose them. Two authors write their opinions on their opposite views on this issue. Sullivan (2002) supports same-sex marriages and believes marriage to be a universal right, not just restricted to heterosexuals. Contrary to Sullivan, Bennett (2002) believes that marriage is a sacred traditional family value that should be set aside for heterosexual couples. (2002)Throughout this essay, I will summarize both authors’ ideas and evaluate them through their evidence and styles.
Wardle, Lynn D. "The Movement To Substitute Generic Adult Intimate "Relationships" For "Marriage”." Marriage and Same-sex Unions: A Debate. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003. 195. Print.
Ettelbrick, Paula L. “Legalizing Gay Marriage Would Harm Homosexuals.” Homosexuality: Opposing Viewpoints. Dudley, William, ed. United States: Opposing Viewpoints Series. Pages 177-183. Print.
Laycock, Douglas, Anthony R. Picarello, and Robin Fretwell. Wilson. Same-sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts. [Washington, D.C.]: Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, 2008. Print.
Same sex marriage is a very controversial topic in today’s society. We live in a society filled with ignorance. The ignorance that poisons the minds of people that oppose same sex marriage blinds them from the reality of the “problem”. People argue that same sex marriage should be illegal for reasons that will have no negative impact on their lives. The reality of this topic is that legalizing same sex marriage promotes the increase of adoption, human rights and equality, as well as the separation of the church and state.
The traditional definition of a marriage has always hinged on the view of a married couple as being composed of a man and a woman (Gerstmann 33). However, during the last three decades there has been a rise in the number of same sex marriages. This has led to heated debates that has made same sex marriages one of the most controversial topics facing the modern society. Despite the US supreme court ruling that the rights to same sex marriage is guaranteed by the constitution, a significant percentage of Americans still oppose its legalization. While some feel that it is morally and legally right, others are of a contrary opinion. Both sides of the divide, those against same sex marriage and those for same sex marriage, present cogent arguments on why their perspectives are valid. This paper argues that the arguments for same sex marriage are more persuasive that those against same sex marriages, and so same sex marriage should be legalized.