Gay Marriage Must Be Legal Essay

The United States of America was founded as a secular sanctuary for ideals like freedom, equality, and tolerance – few will argue against that. Over its history American culture has radically evolved as it strived to meet the ideals its nation was based upon, making changes like ending slavery and providing legal equality for women and minorities, changes that at the time seemed absurd but today are unquestionable merits that define what an “American” is. The quest to reach the ultimate utopian society continues today as true Americans fight the evils of ignorance, stubborn bigotry and the fear to change that still manifest themselves in a large portion of U.S. citizens, preventing this nation from moving forward. One of the outstanding minorities still left to be granted the ideals of freedom, equality, and tolerance are homosexuals trying to obtain the right to marry the person they want to spend the rest of their life with, regardless of gender. Same-sex marriages should be recognized in the eyes of the U.S. government in accordance with its responsibility to provide all American citizens equal freedoms.

Gay marriage is a topic that is so often discussed by those with highly diverse opinions. As some people agree with those of the same sex pursuing marriage, others do not seem to feel the same way. This fact can apply to individuals as well as entire countries. Several of these individuals and countries originally agreed with the subject of gay marriage as others were required to be forced due to the fact that their ban on gay marriage was decided as unconstitutional. Same-sex marriage is a controversial issue in today's world where some choose to agree with the decision of homosexual people and some choose to oppose it, all doing so usually for different reasons.

Hodges, the Supreme Court adjudges the banning of same-sex marriage as violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court clearly establishes that marriage is a fundamental right because marriage is “decisions among the most intimate that an individual can make” (Obergefell v. Hodges, 12) and that individual autonomy should be protected under liberty. The Court also reasons that same-sex couples have the rights to enjoy intimate association that come with marriage. Because the Due Process Clause protects liberty of the citizens and rights to marriage is one of the fundamental liberties, prohibition of same-sex marriage violates the Due Process Clause. For Equal Protection Clause, the Court states that “same-sex couples are denied all the benefits afforded to opposite-sex couples and are barred from exercising a fundamental right” (Obergefell v. Hodges, 17). Because it is solely the sexual preference of the same-sex couples that deprives them of these benefits, the Court argues that the prohibition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection

The United States Constitution protects certain liberties in the Bill of Rights and rights deemed “fundamental” that are “traditionally protected by our society.” (Michael H. v. Gerald D.). The liberty at issue in this case is the right to marry, which has been deemed fundamental by this Court in Loving v. Virginia, where we stated that “[t]he freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.” (Loving v. Virginia). The petitioners in the case at bar seek that liberty by marrying someone of the same sex and having their marriages be equal to traditional, opposite-sex couples.

In detail, by the states restricting same-sex marriages, they have breached constitutional rights of gays which is the fourteenth amendment – the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause. The Petitioner, James Obergefell and other same-sex couples, further argues that same-sex couples are nonetheless than heterosexual couples. While the Respondent, Richard Hodges and state official argues that “the Constitution does not address it, and therefore it is beyond the purview of the Court to decide whether states have to recognize or license such unions.” (Oyez, 2014).

A group of gay couples sued their various relevant state agencies in the states of Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and also in Tennessee. The lawsuits challenged the constitutionality of the bans perpetrated by the states on same-sex marriages or the states’ refusal for the recognition of such legal marriages that occurred within their jurisdictions. The plaintiffs in Obergefell v. Hodges argued that the statutes in their states violated the clause of equal protection. It also violated the clause of Due Protection of the fourteenth amendment. One of the plaintiffs brought an issue with the claims of civil rights. In all the circumstances, the trying courts found favour for the plaintiffs. However, the court of appeal for the 6th Circuit reversed the rulings and held that the ban on same-sex marriages by the states never violated the couples’ 14th amendment rights. The following article will, therefore, give a description and summary of the case Obergefell v. Hodges. It will give its current argument and later take a position so as to argue for one side of the case.

According to DOMA, “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife” (sec 3). Until recently 2013, the US Supreme Court finally delivered the verdict that declared section 3 of the DOMA, which is the rejection of right to gay marriage is unconstitutional (Shapiro 208). In “Gay Marriage Is A Fundamental Right” by Nathan Goetting, “The right to many, and to marry the person of one's choice, is a fundamental right and a necessary aspect of human happiness. This has been an explicitly stated abiding principle since the Court used its power of judicial review to strike down as unconstitutional a legislature's definition of marriage in 1967.” Currently, 17 states in the United States have legalized the right to same sex marriage. The realization of DOMA is unconstitutional has further evidenced that gay marriage is one of the civil right that should not be taken away by the government, and it is an inevitable changes that open doors for equality and equity.

The Supreme Court supported this decision by ruling that the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause promise such liberties. This decision showed the country just how controversial same-sex marriage is as many states, including Tennessee and Kentucky, provided moral obligations as their reasons behind the appeals. This relates to the civil liberties and civil rights in the united states because it violated the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision supports the 14th amendments and supports federal laws as supreme over state laws. This case relates to the 9th amendment because according to the ninth amendment, the “enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” This means that there is no discussion in the original constitution, people have the right to get married. Same sex marriage is a hot topic right now and it seems that in recent years, its been a constant battle of it should be legal or not. So people are interpreting the constitution differently

P. 103. Our Government let states decide decisions on if they want to Legal gays to get married and honor their request. Marriage would be a real concern for the Gay community, because they feel that their civil rights need to be address, and this would let States decide in their community where gays can marry or not, and this would be in the hands Of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided that Gays have the right to marry.

When understanding this case one must look at the true question being posed by people who don’t like the way it is now. Do those two sections have a purpose and are they still needed in the states constitution. The state which oppose change, states that the sections is upholding the beliefs and tradition of the state. It is “deeply rooted in our states history.” (Article IV, Sec 2)They argue that why should we rewrite the definition of marriage to one that has never existed.

In Romer v. Evans, the Supreme Court strikes down Colorado's Amendment 2, which denied gays and lesbians protections against discrimination, calling them “special rights.” According to Justice Anthony Kennedy, “We find nothing special in the protections Amendment 2 withholds. These protections . . . constitute ordinary civil life in a free society.”

In the United States, LGBT rights have been expanded by landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Between 1996 and 2015, the Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws, Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), allowed protected class recognition based on homosexuality and made same-sex marriage legal on a federal level. Justice Kennedy played a pivotal role in expanding the rights of gays and lesbians over the years through specific legal rationale that insists upon protection of LGBT rights. On the other hand, Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinions oppose expanded constitutional protections for gays and lesbians. In order to understand the evolution of LGBT rights, it is crucial to analyze the opinions from Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas,

They want to fight for gay rights because they know that everyone is created equally. In 1989 they made partnership law that people could have the same sex couples. United states first had gay marriage in 1970 with Jake Baker and James McConnell. “ The issues of gay rights encompasses both civil rights and human rights for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) communities.”(“Gay Rights”) “ Around the world, however, members of the LGBT community face a broader set of challenges, such as criminalization and legal sanction, including the death penalty, and extrajudicial killings.”(“Gay Rights”). “The terms gay and homosexual are roughly equivalent and refer generally to men or women who are sexually attracted to people of the same gender.”(”Gay Marriage”)“Homosexuality has existed throughout history and has enjoyed brief periods of open acceptance—even celebration—among certain cultures (for example, in ancient Greece and Rome)”(“Gay Marriage”). Bisexual is a person that are interested in both men and women. Transgender is when someone is born a sex but turns themeselves into the opposite sex .Most people in history kept their sexual preferences private.In a lot of US states the gay marriage law was

The court has compared the opposition to gay marriage to prohibitions against interracial marriage which is a patently false analogy. Men and women from different races are the same, but the genders are distinctly different. It is a biological fact. These unique differences have been shown by studies to have long-term benefits to children that cannot be duplicated by same-sex couples. Those intent on redefining marriage are saying that they are wiser than all the greatest Jewish and Christian thinkers who ever

The concept of marriage is in danger of being misunderstood due to same-sex couples wanting to be married and acquire the same benefits as heterosexual marriages. The fundamental purpose of marriage is uniting a man and a woman in a worthy cause to preserve human civilization. If everyone was homosexual, then how could our species be repeatedly produced? This problem could end human existence. Besides, even those who are not homosexual have restrictions on marriage so they can not assume they are being discriminated upon. Restrictions are created to keep the balance and concept of the idea from being muddled. Their sexual orientation has nothing to do with why these rules were put into place. As a result, homosexual individuals have the right to marry along with everyone else as long as the restrictions are not crossed. All rights are equal among the people even when dealing with marriage. Just because somebody has different