The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Constitution guarantees a right to same-sex marriage. Yet, same-sex marriage continues to be a highly debated issue that leaves our society searching for answers. This has been very apparent during elections when politicians, in order to distract or sway conservative voters, all took a side and had an opinion on the issue of same-sex marriage. The debate has been presented on the left as a civil rights debate, equal rights. And on the right, as a morals debate, a referendum on homosexuality (Rauch, J. 2004). Everyone has an opinion on whether two men or two women should be allowed to get married, and in doing so, have all the same rights granted by the federal government to them as are granted to more “traditional” couples. It is my belief that gay, lesbian, and transgendered couples should be afforded the same privileges as any other citizens including the choice of marriage. Singling out and disallowing certain rights to any person based on sexual orientation, just like race, ethnicity, or religious background, is discrimination. Also, religious views on homosexuality should not have an effect on our laws.
By conservative estimates, there are probably about ten million gay men and lesbians in the United States. And they're going to be there. They're going to be having relationships and they're going to be having kids no matter what we do in our laws and no matter what courts say. And the question about whether gay and lesbian couples should have an equal right to get married under our state laws--we're talking about state laws here, we're not talking about private religious organizations. (Wolff, 2005)
In the past marriage was something everyone was expected to do. ...
... middle of paper ...
...arch 8). Hollywood: World of Wonder.
Inalienable Rites? Gay Marriage in the Courts (2005, March 25). Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson [Radio News Program].
http://www.hoover.org/multimedia/uk/2934426.html
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
Masci, D. (2009, May 21). A Clash of Rights? Gay Marriage and the Free Exercise of Religion.
http://pewforum.org/events/?EventID=216
Masci, D. (2009, July 9). Public Opinion on Gay Marriage: Opponents Consistently Outnumber Supporters.
http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=424
Rauch, J. (2004, April 1). Can Gay Marriage Strengthen the American Family? [Brookings Briefing].
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2004/0401children%20%20%20families/20040401.pdf
Strasser, P. M. (1999). The Challenge of Same-Sex marriage: Federalist Principles and Constitutional Protections. Westport: Preager Publisher.
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.
Waldrep, C. The Use and Abuse of the Law: Public Opinion and United Methodist Church Trials of Ministers Performing Same-Sex Union Ceremonies. Law and History Review, 30, 953-1005.
In his article “Sacred Rite or Civil Right?” Howard Moody tackles the controversial issue of the definition of marriage and inclusion of same-sex marriage into that definition. The real issue that takes center stage is the not so clear separation between the church and the state. Moody, an ordained Baptist minister, shares his belief that it’s only a matter of time that civil law is once again redefined and homosexual marriage is recognized just as much as heterosexual marriage. The gay marriage debate he suggests isn’t focused on the relationship between such couples and is more about how to define such unions as a “marriage”. (353)
While the gay rights movement has been around for some time, the things that they fight for is forever changing. Currently it is fighting for the right to marry, and receive all the rights straight people get when they marry. Married privilege is like white privilege; married people have more rights then non-married people, no matter what sex a person is married to. These benefits include insurance coverage’s under a spouse policy, social security benefit inheritance, receiving pension and personal assets without taxation, visitation rights at the hospital without question and making health care decisions (LaSala, 2007). In addition to all that, there is a social benefit to being married; it represents a healthy, developed and normal relationship (LaSala, 2007). Before reading this article, I never thought about why married people are given all of these rights. I never thought about where they came from, who made them up, or why they were even made. Why are we fighting for legalizing same-sex marriage a...
Wolf, Richard. “Timeline: Same-Sex marriage through the years.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 26 June 2015,
The ruling of Baehr vs. Lewin was a victory for gay rights activists, hope for other states searching for the same freedom, and disappointment for opponents of same-sex marriage. Yet this victory was short lived (until complete legalization in November 13, 2013) since the state appealed the lower court’s decis...
... if? The legal consequences of marriage and the legal needs of lesbian and gay male couples. Michigan Law review. Nov.1996. Pg. 447-491. http://www.jstor.org.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/stable/1290119?seq=1&uid=3739664&uid=2134&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103079482127
Stoddard, T, Fein, B, (Jan. 1990) Gay Marriage, Personal relationships, Marriage, Legislation, Homosexuality, American Bar Association, (Pages 42, 42)
Stone, Geoffrey. "Judges Now Recognize Anti-Gay Marriage Laws Are Irrational." The Daily Beast. N.p., 03 Apr 2014. Web. 13 Apr 2014. .
... the past several years is the same-sex family. Since the sexual revolution of the 1960’s, changing attitudes have brought more tolerance to the gay and lesbian community. This has somewhat loosened the stigma previously associated with this segment of the population. Along with evolving public attitudes, economic and legal changes in the United States have also reduced barriers previously facing same-sex couples making it more likely for them to form families (Butler, 2004). On the other hand, continued strong institutional ties to marriage between one man and one woman continue to pose problem for this group and shape social agendas (Glenn, 2004; Lind, 2004). While several states and many employers have given recognition and benefits to homosexual partners, there is still no uniform policy in place which addresses their familial rights in the United States.
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.