Same Sex Marriage Research Paper

The Declaration of Independence, since July 4th, 1776, has continued to always become a guideline to protect those who are oppressed. “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, “that all Men are created equal,” that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,”” (Doc. A) sets the standards on what the United States of America is all about; equality. From the Report of American Horse by D.F. Royer on November 27, 1890 to the “Reminder Day” for Homosexual Rights on

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.

Is it okay to not believe in gay marriage, yet at the same time support the constitutional rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for homosexual couples? Even though most churches' beliefs conflict with marrying same-sex partners, government should not deny a person's right to their happiness; because any person, no matter race, color, sex, religion or sexual orientation, should be allowed to exercise their constitutional rights as Americans to pursue their happiness; and married gay couples should be able to have a spectrum of rights and benefits if their gay partnership is legalized.

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.

Despite the historical aspects of gay marriage, all across the United States many hetero sexual and homosexual communities have spoken up about their natural rights, freedom of religion.

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 United States’ Declaration of Independence reads, “[We] hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address furthers, “[the] [United States’] fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” But in the United States today, not all are equal. Within the majority of the United States, same-sex couples cannot be married or reap the benefits of said marriage. Marriage is basic to the recognition as equals in society and any status short of this becomes

     A debate is raging in America about who people have a right to marry. In response to lesbians and gays asking for the right to marry, many legislators are writing laws to ban same-sex marriage in their respective states. Even President Bush supports a Constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage (prez.bush.marriage/). Opponents of such legislation do not want discrimination passed into law and are protesting at every opportunity. One must understand the reasons that people want to ban same-sex

The legalization of gay marriage has been a controversial issue in many state courts since the mid 1970s. Gay marriage scares many people because it strays from the norms of heterosexual relationships. Traditional American ideals have become a part of culture and society that everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, or race, or gender, expect to have as a basic human rights. Several times in history these have been identified as inalienable rights. One of the expected rights of many American citizens is the right to choose who they love, who they marry, and how they live their day to day life. When heterosexual Americans were introduced to the idea of same sex marriage, they became afraid that it would “taint the minds of the young members of the community,” since homosexualty was and still is frowned upon in the community. Thus, the homosexual community’s opportunity to freely choose how to live their life is taken

In addition to the hostility and embarrassment that homosexuals face every day, they also encounter political and legal policies and practices that prevent them from living a normal life like heterosexual people. For example, there are laws that prevent people of the same gender to be legally married to each other such as proposition eight in California. Gay people just want the right to be able to be happy with a significant other, make a family, and show their loyalty in each other through marriage. There is no difference whether that significant other is of the same gender or opposite, at the end of the day they just want that chance of happiness just like everyone else. Unfortunately, there are laws in places that prevent that from becoming true. Not allowing homosexuals to marry can affect many people’s lives and can even be detrimental to one’s health. For example in the article “The Case of Sharon Kowalski and Karen Thompson: Ableism,

Supreme Court passed Proposition 8 which states that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Perry claims that not allowing gay couples to marry violates Amendment Fourteen, the Equal Protection Clause. On the contrary, Hollingsworth argues that same-sex couples are a bad example of married couples that have kids, as well as a religion that indicates a marriage solely for a man and a woman. This particular case questions if the Supreme Court has the right to say that a marriage should only be between a man and a woman and that if gay couples marry will it be a bad example to other marriages and the kids they have. Another case that this article brings up is United States v Windsor, in this case a couple that marries in Canada but lives in New York does not get defined as married couple. Since one of the partners passed away, all of the property the person left to her partner had taxes to be payed that she shouldn’t have to pay in the first place, but because in New York they weren’t an official married couple, she had to do

“Civil marriage between individuals of the same-sex is therefore an issue in which fundamental human rights are at stake “(Love Is a...). If people are of legal age they should be able to be with whomever they would like. “The denial of equal civil recognition of same-sex relationships prevents many people from accessing other rights, such as rights to housing and social security, and stigmatizes those relationships in ways that can fuel discrimination and other human rights abuses against people

The proposed legalization of same-sex marriage is one of the most significant issues in contemporary American family law. As a heavily campaigned development currently discussed in law assessment; these extremely confrontational and debatable political questions are facing present day American courts. If same-sex marriage is legalized, its affect on the parents, children, same sex couples, families, and the social and political world will be astronomical. The arguments surrounding the issue though confrontational nonetheless are easily seen from a wide array of perspectives. One of the perspectives states that marriage is a promise to a spouse to stay loyal and faithful in all

Proposition 8 Violates the separation of church and state. In the state of California Proposition 8 passed. Proposition 8 would deny gays the right to marry, a civil right that is

Today many people have their own opinions and beliefs when it comes down to the topic of gay marriage. I personally feel that gay marriage should be legalized. Yes God said, “That marriage is to be between a man and a woman.” My question is, “What gives people the right to judge or tell another human-being who to love or how to love?” I personally feel it’s insulting to one’s integrity and people should be able to express their love how they see fit.