Marriage Is a Commitment and Legal Contract Between Same Sexes Too

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.

Marriage has been defined as “the legal status, condition, or relationship that results from a contract by which one man and one woman, who have the capacity to enter into such an agreement, mutually promise to live together in the relationship of husband and wife in law for life, or until the legal termination of the relationship.” (Marriage, n.d.) In 1973, Maryland became “the first state to pass a statute banning marriage between same-sex couples.” (Freedom to Marry, 2015) After much debate, on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled for a ‘Freedom to Marry’ in all states, even against the states who still had a ban on same-sex marriage. (Freedom to Marry, 2015) Obviously, even with a federal ruling and over thirty years, there is still a

The definition of marriage has changed over time. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the United States defined marriage as a union between a consenting man and woman, of non-African decent (Stahlberg, 2008, p. 443). This, however, changed after the civil war. In 1868 two consenting adults of opposite gender could marry someone of the same race, but this was also restructured in 1967 to allow marriage of all consenting adults of opposite genders regardless of race (Stahlberg, 2008, p. 443). Today, the law looks very different. Recently, on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marriage (gay marriage, 2015).

On June 26,2015, the Supreme Court sided that gay marriage is a right protected by the U.S. Constitution in all 50 states. Previously, to their decision, same sex marriage was already legal in 37 states and

Marriage is universally understood to be the legal union between a man and a woman. This acknowledgement, however, has recently generated dispute and controversy in certain individuals, primarily homosexuals and supporters of homosexual marriages. This opposition, due to this mainstream view, exists because certain states such as Minnesota deny same-sex marriages.

However, in 2010, the Supreme Court declared Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional, forcing the federal government to recognize legal marriages of same-sex couples. This enabled committed same-sex couples that are legally married in their own states to receive federal protections.

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.

The argument brought before the Supreme Court was to eliminate the ban on same sex marriage that was still held by thirteen states. This was done as part of a lawsuit called Obergefell versus Hodges. Court documents outline that, “14 same-sex couples and two men whose same-sex partners are deceased, filed suits in Federal District Courts in their home States, claiming that respondent state officials violate the Fourteenth Amendment by denying them the right to marry or to have marriages lawfully performed in another State given full recognition.” (United States Court of Appeals)

Traditional wedding vows state, “I, (name), take you (name), to be my (wife/husband), to have and to hold from this day forward, for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish; from this day forward until death do us part”(Callaway). Marriage is defined as two people bond together legally under the protection of laws. Couples are able to express and establish their life long relationships officially, publicly, and permanently. Due to the fact that homosexual relationships are increasingly more accepted by the public, gay marriage has become one of the most controversial topics throughout the US. The fundamental human right of marriage should not be limited to a man and a woman;

The section 2 of DOMA it states to give legal relief to any state from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdiction (Campbell, 2012). Cases such as In re Kandu, a couple whom married in Canada attempted to file joint bankruptcy petition but were denied and Wilson V. Ake whom married in Massachusetts had there marriage license denied in Florida. These various federal lawsuits, some filed alongside of section 3, also challenged section 2. In the case of Obsergefell v. Hodges on June 26th, 2015 the U.S Supreme Court ruled that the 14th amendment requires all U.S. state laws to recognize same-sex marriages, this decision left section 2 of DOMA unenforceable (Campbell,

On June 26, 2013, The United States Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enabling same-sex couples legally married under state law to be recognized for the purpose and benefit of federal law. Section 3 of DOMA previously defined marriage as the legal union of two persons of the opposite sex. This definition was challenged in several court cases for violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Edith Windsor in U.S. v. Windsor, declaring DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional and allowing same-sex couples to be recognized as married for federal purposes. This opens up several opportunities within federal income tax and estate and gift tax. Some of these benefits include higher standard deductions and gain exclusion; opportunity to lower tax bracket through combining incomes; and entitlement to the marital deduction, gift splitting, and portability of DSUE. Marriage also results in tax disadvantages such as the marriage penalty, joint and several liability, and refund offsetting. Taxpayers and tax preparers should be aware of the new planning opportunities available to married same-sex couples,

Since America was founded, heterosexual marriages have been the only legal way to get a marital licence and be considered by the government and the state legally married. However, in 1970 Richard Baker and Michael McConnell applied for a marital licence and were denied because they were both of a male gender. In turn, the couple sued the man who denied their marriage, and it traveled all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and they still lost. This was the first ever record of a homosexual couple fighting the government for the right of same sex marriage. The battle grew and grew, becoming more popular until they came to the Supreme Court for one last appeal. On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that all 50 states must allow a couple of

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage is a right protected by the US Constitution in all 50 states. Before that decision was made, same-sex marriage was already legal in 37 states and Washington DC, but was banned in the remaining

The right to same sex marriage has been involved within the Constitution as part of Amendments V, VIII, and XV. Marriage is both global and central. All across our country, in every region, every social class, every race and ethnicity, every religion or non-religion, people get married. Same sex marriage was a division of social and political. An example of a court case dealing with same sex marriage is Baehr v. Lewin. In 1993, Hawaii’s high court issues first-of-a-kind ruling that a barrier to marriage is discrimination, launching the freedom to marry movement. Three years later in 1996, a full trial took place and was decided that the same-sex couples are entitled to marriage licenses. Later in 1998, Hawaii amends its constitution with regard to marriage by exempting same-sex couples from protection of equality guarantee, giving legislature the power to define marriage as limited to a man and a woman. However, a year later in 1999, Baehr v. Lewin Hawaii’s high court rules that Hawaii’s constitution no longer protects lesbian and gay individuals with regard to their freedom to marry. As in today, some states in the United States did not approve the right for same sex marriage. On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to force same-sex marriage on all 50 states. According to the Supreme Court Justice page, “The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that there is a federal constitutional right to

The current major state and federal law that is affecting same-sex marriage is the Defense of Marriage Act , or DOMA as it also called. The Defense of Marriage Act is a federal law that allows each state to recognize or deny any marriage-like relationship between persons of the same-sex that has been recognized in another state and it also explicitly recognizes for purposes of federal law that marriage is "a legal union of one man and one woman as husband and wife" and by stating that spouse "refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or wife." When asking the people that I interviewed what their feelings were towards the Defense of Marriage Act and how it currently affects the issue of same-sex marriage and the interviewees who were for same-sex marriage felt that the law was inherently wrong and the person I interviewed who was opposed to same-sex marriage thought the law was good except for one obvious flaw with it.