Same-Sex Marriage and Religion: An Inappropriate Relationship

In recent years, the debate over same-sex marriage has grown into a nationwide controversy, reverberating into the halls of congress, at the white house, in dozens of state and legislature and courtrooms, and in the rhetoric of election campaigns at both the national and state levels. As the debate rages on, the American religious community remains deeply divided over the issue, and over the morality of homosexuality. The debate has grown from an issue that occasionally arose in a few states to a national and even worldwide controversy.

Before the eighteenth century, marriage was far less complicated. Verbal consent and consumation constituted legal marriage: "once the knot was tied by such verbal exchanges it could not be

Same-sex marriage, a controversial social issue in the U.S. for several decades, is constantly evolving. When viewed historically, great change has happened in a short period of time, in the movement for same-sex marriage, given that until recently, no society in thousands of years has ever allowed it.

In history the marriage contract or agreement has been guided by moral, social and religious ideals. Today, the local, state and federal governments play a role in marriage, but not in a way of promoting marriage. Suzanne Bianchi and Lynne Casper state “marriage is a relationship between two people of the opposite sex that adheres to legal, moral and social rules … a social institution that rests upon common values and shared expectations for appropriate

In our nation, the battle still continues over marriage equality. In 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples had the right to get married. 18,000 same-sex couples were married throughout the state. Six months later, voters passed Proposition 8, a ballot initiative, which defined marriage as between one man and one man in California. In the article published by Marriage Equality USA, Prop 8 Hurt My Family – Ask me how, discusses Proposition 8 before it was overturned. Marriage Equality USA describes their selves, as: “A national organization whose mission is to secure legally recognizes civil marriage equality for all, at the federal and state level, without regard to gender identity or sexual orientation” (p. 69). Marriage Equality USA illustrates that Proposition 8 caused Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) individual, family member and straight allies experiences homophobia, verbal abuse and physical abuse. Marriage Equality USA decided to write this essay in hopes that the California Supreme Court to overturn Proposition 8.

For the past, few centuries the concept of marriage has become a matter of church and state. Those who wish to become a married couple within the United States must get permission from the states by obtaining a marriage license. According to Taking Marriage Private by Stephanie Coontz for sixteen centuries marriage was valid based upon the couples wishes. If both the man and women claimed they had exchanged vows, then the Catholic Church would recognize it as a valid marriage. Today all states require that a couple obtain a marriage license from the state if they want the marriage to be legal and valid in the eyes of the state.

A hot topic in American politics today is the question of civil rights. While a civil right is defined as an enforceable right or privilege, people still have trouble agreeing what should be counted as a civil right. In a recent event, two civil rights that come into contention with each other were gay marriage and religious freedom. A prime example of the conflict was the case of Kim Davis, who denied same-sex couples marriage licenses based on religious freedom. The case showed us that a civil right needs to have limitations so as to not infringe on other constitutional civil rights. In other words, the state should not allow religious freedom to hinder marriage equality. This is what we will examine throughout the

In the United States, legalization of same-sex marriage has a long-standing history of opposition from religious circles. Some argue against the legalization of same-sex marriage based on their interpretation of the Bible’s stance against homosexuality (Dobson, O’Brien). Other opponents argue against the practice based on universal tenets of moral behavior, fundamental beliefs that are said to underpin our country’s existing laws and should not be eroded (George, Finnis, Friedman).

Marriage in ancient civilizations and until the twentieth century was an arraignment made between two families to gain a political and social benefits. One reason divorce and infidelity were prohibited was to ensure families could not lose those benefits. Instead of developing a different system to join two people together,

These marriages had both religious and secular facets, but the religious aspects of the marriage were defined by the Bible. Canon laws are laws set forth by the teaching of the Bible; therefore the laws which govern marriage can be found in the Bible, and have been interpreted by those in authority in the Church. First and foremost the laws state that there are two parts to a marriage; the first being consent, and the second being consummation. In book four of, Marriage Canons from the Decretum of Gratian and The Decretals, Sext, Clementines and Extravagantes, it is written, “Proper and certain betrothals, with valid consent, although they do not give rise to an impediment of public propriety, do present a diriment impediment to subsequent betrothals, but not to preceding ones.” This states, that most marriages are lawful with the exception of those of “diriment impediment”, or a voidable infraction of canon law, i.e. prior marriage.

Marriage has different purposes over time. In an article from Eli J. Finkel (New York Times, Feb 14, 2014), before 1850, institutional marriage was the standard. People

In the reading of “Why Get Married?” we learn several reasons for getting married. The first reason mentioned is sexual intercourse. Paul said that sexual intercourse signifies and seals a personal union. This requires a total and permanent partnership between man and woman to avoid fornication. Genesis 2:18 (NIV) says, “The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” God wanted man to have a companion. In today's times, another reason for marriage is legal matters. In a court of law, a marriage certificate will protect both parties’ children, property, and income taxes, deaths, burials, inheritances, possible divorces, and other contingencies. Marriage also protects from third party intrusions

The political aspects of whether same-sex couples should be allowed to federal and government recognized marriages are a very complex issue. There are basically two sides to the political argument of whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. On one side are the liberals who feel that marriage is a civil right that should be denied based on the basis of a person's sexual orientation. On the other side you have conservatives who feel that marriage is an institution in which should only constitute one man and one woman. In this report we are going to examine how the issue of same-sex marriages are affecting our current political environment, how politics is affecting the movement for

Marriage has evolved over time. Once, far back in history, when states were run in close cooperation with religious leaders, a marriage was strictly the dominion of the church, and the only definition was much like the one above (though they were more lax in avoiding incest than I would suspect Schulman’s proposed structure would be). In the eyes, there had to be a system where sex would be legitimized, while women and children were protected from it and its consequences. This made sense when repeated sex acts would almost definitely cause pregnancy, and possibly spread disease. As religion and government split into different organizations, each retained a definition of marriage that was a bit different from the other. Since religion held sway over what was considered pure and good, it took it upon itself to retain the parts of the old structure that dealt with the morality and social responsibility of marriage, and this is generally considered to be a social structure of marriage. And now, the social form of marriage is migrating into being controlled by the couple who are being married instead of their church. The government, on the other hand, became able to define who would be able to marry and place official benefits and restrictions on a married couple, creating a legal structure of marriage that was not the same as the social one. While

Today, marriage has evolved and changed in many ways. Partners in marriage do not have civil control over one another. Both partners in marriage are now equals. Pre nuptials are used when on partner, intending to marry wishes to protect their assets. The church no longer has legitimate power to control the public institution of marriage. The reason that religion is no longer a requirement for marriage is because of the doctrine of separation of church and state that our nation has a history of implementing. Separation of church and state