On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Many conservative groups do NOT agree with this decision. The gay marriage debate has been simmering for as long as I can remember. The four articles I have selected give information from four different perspectives including that of liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and orthodox Jews. With so many differing opinions, one can understand why it's been so hard for the nation to come to agree on this issue. In an article titled "Witch Hunt in the Golden State", David N. Bass sheds light on on his opinion that same-sex marriage activists are using nonsensical methods of defending their case. According to the article, the US 9th Circuit of Appeals received a request from two homosexual couples that would force the campaigners againt gay marriage to make their private communications during the campaign available to the public. This, an attorney for the two homosexual couples believes, would make it apparent that the campaign against same sex marriage used an unfair method of invoking fear that both traditional marriage and society as a whole would collapse if gay marriage were allowed. On the other hand, attorneys for the advocates of traditional marriage believe that being forced to give out their internal communications during the Proposition 8 campaign would be an infringement on the freedom of speech and the unwritten rules of politics. The author goes on to say that gay marriage activists are being hypocritical because they too have had their share of "unfair" political campaigning methods. He states that the Proposition 8 campaign was remarkably open, and that all of their methodologies for f... ... middle of paper ... ...y 42 years ago when I person was not allowed to marry another person because of they were a different race. The thought of restricting marriage on the basis of race is completely unimaginable today. And 42 years from, now, I hope the thought of restricting marriage on the basis of sexual orientation is also unfathomable. WORKS CITED Works Cited Bass, David. "Witch Hunt in the Golden State." Spectator.org. 7 December 2009. Spectator, Web. 9 Dec 2009. Mulvihall, Geoff. "Rabbis, heterosexuals join in NJ gay marriage debate." Townhall.com. 01 December 2009. Townhall, Web. 9 Dec 2009. Rauch, Jonathan. "Gay Marriage Is Good for America." Wall Street Journal (2008): n. pag. Web. 9 Dec 2009. Daum, Meghan. "John Marcotte: defending marriage by denying divorce." LATimes.com. 9 December 2009. LA Times, Web . 9 Dec 2009
He continues to support the main claim by showing his knowledge of married couples’ legal rights. He explains that homosexual couples that are not allowed to marry are denied tax breaks, group insurance, and pension programs (Stoddard, 1988, p. 551). These are important grounds,...
Throughout the recent history of America, gay marriage has always been an issue. With the different views and morals everyone has on the subject, it makes it hard for individual states to determine what side they should be on. In 1983 a Harvard Law School student, Evan Wolfson, wrote a thesis stating the rule of marriage equality. Justices concluded that gay couples were entitled to the legal benefits of civil marriage; and most crucially in the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts, whose favorable ruling, in a suit by lawyer Mary Bonauto and the Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocated and Defenders, led to the nation’s first bona fide same-sex marriages…” (“Gay Marriage turns 10 and Credit Should Be Spread around- The Boston Globe). On May 17, 2004 Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriages. In June of 2013, California legalized gay marriages, which helped their large LGBT (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered) community. (“History and Timeline of the Freedom…”). When this finally happened, it was seen as a great achievement by Karmala Harris, a California Attorney. “This is a profound day in our country, and its just the right thing: ‘Justice is finally being served’” (“Court Gives OK for California Gay Marriages”).
Abstract On June 26, 2015 a divided Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples could now marry nationwide. At the time of the split ruling there were 9 supreme court justices, 5 of the justices were Republicans, and the remaining 4 were Democrats. In high profile cases it is except that the justices will vote along party lines. When the 5-4 ruling was reveled by the following statement. “It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right (Corn,2015).” written by
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.
It was not that long ago that interracial marriage was prohibited in the United States. In fact, in 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court decision established that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. Laws against interracial marriage were unfair and unconstitutional according to the 14th amendment, which granted citizens the right to equal protection of the law and due process. The famous case that granted the right to marry interracially was Loving vs. Virginia. In June 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, an African American woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia where it was legal. When returning back home the Lovings were charged with violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages. The couple...
Lipp, Murray. "7 Ways the U.S.A. Benefits From the Legalization of Gay Marriage." The Huffington
(357) Especially considering the changes made for the gay and lesbian community involvement in legalized marriage since this article was written in the July 5, 2004 issue of the Nation. This goes to prove to me that Moody’s prediction was accurate in assuming great changes were right around the corner in the development of marriage. I am further convinced of the advancement of homosexual marriage and believe that in the very near future there will be marriage equality for all. Allowing homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals will benefit everyone simply by creating us all once again equal. This will create protection for all family units with
At a time when many observers question whether America has made any real progress, on the racial front, it is worth recalling that as late as 1967, sixteen states prohibited people from marrying across racial frontiers. Now no such prohibitions exist... Just as many people once found trans-racial marriage to be a loathsome potentiality well-worth prohibiting, so, too, do many people find same-sex marriage to be an abomination.
...nstead of setting marriage limitations based off of race, the government now says that same-sex marriage is illegal in over half of the states. Sixty years from now, the American people will look back on the 21st century and be appalled at how the people from today allowed their government to make it illegal for certain couples to get married, just as the people of today are disgusted with the ban on marriage between interracial couples before 1967.
Shulman, Sam. "Sam Shulman -- Gay Marriage -- and Marriage." OrthodoxyToday.org |. Commentary Magazine, Nov. 2003. Web. 31 May 2010. .
Becker, Joe. "A Conservative’s Road to Same-Sex Marriage Advocacy." New York Times 18 Aug. 2009: 1-3. Print.
Legal marriage is the right of all Americans regardless of their sexual orientation. Gay marriage is certainly a hot button issue. It invokes an emotional dialogue filled with passion, rage, hate and fear. However, at the base of it all, are two people who are in a committed relationship living normal and productive lives and contributing to society in a positive manner. This issue is being debated in every state of the union, and will eventually go to the Supreme Court.
The way society views same sex marriage can change. Throughout history, many beliefs have changed. In the past, black people were not considered as citizens in the constitution. It is not until the thirteenth amendment in 1865 that slavery was banned. Women were not considered equal to men and were not given the right to vote until 1920 when congress passed the fourteenth amendment. It takes time but opinions and beliefs can change and the past has shown us that is indeed possible! Same sex marriage are nothing more than the union of two humans being that care, love, and want to make commitments to each other. That commitment can not be recognized unless same sex marriage is legalized.
On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Should gay marriages be legal? Clearly we as a nation are undecided on this issue. Thirty-six states have passed legislation banning gay marriages, yet a few states have passed laws that allows homosexual couples the right to participate in civil unions. Several other states are also debating whether or not to allow these couples to marry. Unfortunately, the dispute has left the United States' homosexual community in an awkward position. There are some people who think that gay people have no rights and should never be allowed to marry, and others believe that gay people should enjoy the same rights and privileges as heterosexuals. I think that the United States should allow same-sex couples to marry just like heterosexual couples.
In conclusion I argue that banning same-sex marriage is discriminatory. It is discriminatory because it denies homosexuals the many benefits received by heterosexual couples. The right to marriage in the United States has little to do with the religious and spiritual meaning of marriage. It has a lot to do with social justice, extending a civil right to a minority group. This is why I argue for same-sex marriage. The freedom to marry regardless of gender preference should be allowed.