Gay Marriage Should be Legal

opinionated Essay
2010 words
2010 words

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.

There are many opponents of gay people as it is, and they all have their reasons to dislike the idea of permitting them get married. One of the main reasons is that the primary purpose of marriage is procreation. Because gay couples are unable to have children, they should not be allowed to marry (Schiffen 495). Another main argument is that the word marriage means the union of one man and one woman. This is a long-standing theme of most major Western religions. Under a proposed bill known as the Defense of Marriage act, marriage is defined as “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” Furthermore, it defines a spouse as “ a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or wife” (What 1). Under these guidelines, it is quite obvious that gay couples would not be eligible for marriage. People against homosexual marriage also say that it is a person’s choice to be gay. Since the individual chooses to be a homosexual, they should not be given special privileges. Another argument that you hear is that these couples should not get married simply because of the torment and ridicule they would be faced with in their everyday lives. There are news reports from across America telling about how a gay person was beaten or killed just because they were looked at as different. Some of these people would end up the target of verbal abuse and maybe even physical abuse, just because some heterosexual people see them as different.

In this essay, the author

  • Opines that the united states should allow same-sex couples to marry just like heterosexual couples.
  • Explains that there are many opponents of gay marriage, and they all have their reasons to dislike the idea of permitting them get married.
  • Opines that there are some silly arguments that should be discarded immediately. one is that marriage is traditionally a heterosexual institution.
  • Argues that marriage, polygamy and all other horrible consequences are absurd to even consider as legitimate arguments from intelligent people. according to the united states constitution, every individual has right to happiness.
  • Opines that america is the home of land, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
  • Argues that homosexuals aren't being treated fairly, and gay rights activists have cited over 300 benefits that gay couples are not permitted to enjoy.
  • Explains that homosexuals are denied the right to claim the estate of their spouses if there is no will present when one of the partners dies.
  • Explains that gays are excluded from group insurance and pension plans offered through their spouse's jobs, and they are not officially recognized by insurance companies.
  • Explains that gays do not enjoy the judicial spousal privilege concerning legal matters. since homosexual couples are not officially married, the
  • Explains that the plaintiffs claimed their constitutional rights were being denied because the state refused to grant them marriage licenses. the state court ruled against them, citing the link between procreation and marriage.
  • Explains that the plaintiffs and the gay community felt that their rights were being infringed on. the vermont supreme court ruled that it was unconstitutional to deny marriage licenses to homosexuals.
  • Explains that enacted a law permitting civil unions of gay couples to be performed, giving the same privileges to homosexual couples as areafforded their heterosexual counterparts.
  • Opines that couples will be looked at differently in other states, whereas if they remained in vermont, things might be easier for them. other states have recently faced problems with bills involving gay marriage.
  • Explains that california's "process of marriage" initiative would clarify that only male-femalemarriage is valid in california. new york has also recently passed a bill banninghomosexual civil unions.
  • Explains beatrice dohrn's hope that many states will recognize civil unions and establish their own laws, citing the u.s. constitution’s full faith and credit clause.
  • Explains that marriage is first and foremost a union between two people who love each other. raising children is not necessarily stipulation of marriage.
  • Argues that procreation of the species is invalid because we permit the elderly and the sexually infertile to marry knowing that they will not be able to produce children.
  • Opines that allowing homosexual couples to marry and adopt would reduce the number of children who don’t have parents and give them a better chance to make something of themselves having parents.
  • Argues that homosexual people should not be allowed because it is theirchoice to be gay. people make different choices every day that maybe some groups of individuals would find wrong or offensive.
  • Explains that many people would have religious problems with homosexual couples joining in a civil union. traditional religious views in the united states, such as those held by the roman catholics and protestants, view homosexuality as immoral and sinful
  • Explains why we make the distinction between church and state. different religions have different views on issues such as abortion and homosexual marriage.
  • Opines that america is not yet truly free, not until we as a nation are free.
Get Access