Ambivalence

Additionally, people argue that, as a result of newfound religious freedom, the government no longer mandated personal beliefs. This is also untrue. Even today, the courts establish laws that govern moral issues. Recent examples of this are the recent passage of a federal law that allows homosexual marriage and the resulting incarceration of Kim Davis, a county clerk in Kentucky, who opposed the law.

Another way the government protects our rights is by the justice system. The justice system includes creating and passing laws that protect the rights of people. There has been a lot of conflicting feelings about equal right among everything, but what hold the most controversy is the LGBT becoming equal with the rest of the world and recently laws have been passed to try and equalize the LGBT community with the rest of the citizens, in 2015 the Supreme Court's announced “States cannot keep same-sex couples from marrying and must recognize their unions, the Supreme Court says in a ruling that for months has been the focus of speculation. “(Chappell). This means all 50 states must allow same-sex marriage no matter how the states feel about the issue, in order for the law to pass it had to go through the Justice System. This proves that the Justice System helps to protect the right of citizens because everyone has the right to marry even if it is the same-sex, by it becoming law it further protects this right that citizens are entitled to. This isn’t the only case of the the Justice system has helped to safeguard people's rights. In California a law

In a very real sense, it is reasonable to argue that the government should have no say at all in the processes of marriage, or decide which adults may or may not legally marry. State and federal governments play a role, of course, in that marriage is a civil union, and provides benefits and legal protections for the couple. Historically, marriage serves the interests of the society by promoting stability and future generations of citizens, and governments usually act in ways to promote this very vital element. At the same time, it is highly questionable whether this governmental authority should have any voice in who chooses to marry, provided those involved are adults and wish to do so. This is in fact, at the heart of the same-sex

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court Case Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) which nationally legalized same sex marriage, the religious right has felt that protections on religious liberty in this country have gone under attack. As the LGBTQ+ movement gains more traction in mainstream media, local municipalities, and even state governments, many religiously conservative states legislatures have begun to fight back by passing laws that protect a person’s right to discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community because of religious objections. While a person’s right to abstain from participating in a business transaction concerning a same sex marriage has been widely debated (and continues to be widely debate) for some time now, the new anti-transgender

Some citizens support the idea of laws and rules being passed in support of transgenders rights, but they believe that the federal government does not need to be involved. They believe that schools, institutions, and the workplace can regulate themselves. Although America is showing progress towards transgender equality, there are still many who refuse to acknowledge

In as much freedom for expression and belief I essential for every citizen within a state, it is critical to ensure that the general conduct of the citizens is right and also very ethical. Homosexual behavior is not proper, and it affects the morals and conducts of a nation. It destroys the rapport of the society. This is a destruction of the law of nature that is even against the religious beliefs and the general culture of any nation (Hermann, 2016). It is essential to give the citizens the right that they deserve. However, it is important to ensure that freedom never exploited to the extent that it corrupts morals and good conduct. I support the Texas ruling that demands it unlawful for two people of the same sex to engage in the intimate sexual conduct. It is right to say that individuals make offense when engaging in sexual intercourse with an individual of the same sex. The prohibition of gay and lesbianism is not a denial of liberty for the citizens (Goldberg

Human beings have always fought for the right to control their bodies and engage in practices that please themselves and their bodies. Similarly, the society, in general, has tried to regulate the control of human bodies and set rules that do not favor everyone's opinion. The most common forms of body control that have been fought over for a long time include freedom of sexuality and freedom of abortions. In the case of sexuality, the society, mostly backed by religious institutions has tried to eliminate homosexuality despite the fact that many members of the society are naturally born gay or homosexual. Additionally, the society has done its best to prohibit abortions with minimal success. In the past, the freedom of sexuality

The freedom to be who you want is not the case either in our government because we are all different and some are homosexuals some people practice a different religion. Many get penalized or ridiculed for being different like a homosexual, or being a Muslim. The fact is these are human beings too and not everyone will be the same all the time. The way we view everything is how we manage to make the best of things, and sometimes that can be hard from the world we live in. We do have choices in life that defines who and what we are, but many people will not see it the same way.

In the political stream, there are usually a change which is caused by the shifts of important participants in the system. The changes have an impacts on policy agendas and the outcome. The antigovernment mood is the changes in the national public. The national mood plays a vital role it can create the fertile ground for a policy's promotion or, on the other hand, it can slow a policy down.

The main question that Martha Nussbaum’s Political Emotions undertakes is “How can a decent society do more for stability and motivation than Locke and Kant did, without becoming illiberal and dictatorial in the manner of Rousseau?”. Here the term “decent society”, is implied to be a form of “political liberalism” in which political principles are not built upon comprehensive doctrines, and in which the idea of equal respect for individual views gives rise to careful self-discipline of governments to not endorse of any bias. She further adds 4 crucial points that not to be overlooked or misinterpreted and they are as followed 1.) The account of political emotions assumes a set of normative commitments. 2.)

Marriage provides both physical and psychological health benefits and banning gay marriage increases rates of psychological disorders. The American Journal of Public Health found that after their states had banned gay marriage they had a 37% increase in mood disorders, a 42% increase in alcohol- use disorders, and a 48% increase in generalized anxiety disorders. Banning gay marriage is against the constitution. It’s protected by Constitutions commitments to liberty and equality. The US supreme court ruled in 1974s Cleveland Board of

As we know, same-sex marriage has been discussed and argued for a long time. Within the controversial topic of gay rights, there’s no area more controversial than same-sex marriage. And all of us ask ourselves if same-sex marriage should be legal or not. But the fact is that we have to start thinking about it as a moral and religious topic. The government shouldn’t legalize the same-sex marriage because the

As the society changing, the history of marriage also changes. Marriage is legally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship, but do those two partners always have to be a man and a woman? Most people believe that homosexuals should be granted equal rights as heterosexual couples. Being as an important social issue, same-sex marriage has become a hot topic of public debates in the recent years. For over the past decade, public support for the same-sex marriage has quickly risen. The United States is one of over twenty countries that allow gay and lesbian couples to wed. I believe that same-sex marriage should be legalized in all countries for several reasons, such as being an issue of equal rights, separation of church and state, no negative effect on the heterosexual communities, increasing in child adoption, and decreasing divorce and suicide rates.

Allowing same-sex marriages would change the basic definition of marriage. Marriage is an important commitment of a man and a woman who contribute to civilization. Therefore, the loss of contributions due to someone’s sexual orientation should not be rewarded with a privilege such as marriage. Same-sex marriages affect many factors such as children, the concept of marriage, and humanity. However, it is not a misdemeanor to love somebody of the same gender but it can rigorously damage many aspects of life.

As we know, same-sex marriage has been a prominent issue that has so many arguments not just in the United States, but around the world over many years now. There is absolutely nothing more controversial than same-sex marriage in gay rights topic. Everyone has different opinions about same-sex marriage whether it should be legal or not. We now have to consider two aspects that are moral and religious. These two form a fundamental belief that same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples are different. Based on the definition of marriage, the view of religion, bad effects to children, and the lifestyle that should not be encouraged; therefore, the government should not legalize the same-sex marriage.