Should Gay Marriage Be Legal Defense And Education Fund Supports Same Sex Marriage?

The argument over the legalization of same sex marriages is rapidly becoming one of the most vigorously advocated reform subjects in recent law review. Being gay and loving someone is not illegal, but uniting that couple in a legal marriage is rejected by most of society in this country. Each state has had to deal with legal issues concerning same sex marriages to some extent. Most supporters of the ban on gay marriages believe that it would be a strong cause of immorality and corruption of the American family. People who do not support same sex marriages believe that it would create an unhealthy family, and could cause serious harm to children in that family, while supporters

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.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Many conservative groups do NOT agree with this decision. The gay marriage debate has been simmering for as long as I can remember. The four articles I have selected give information from four different perspectives including that of liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and orthodox Jews. With so many differing opinions, one can understand why it's been so hard for the nation to come to agree on this issue.

A metamorphosis in how the American judicial system perceives same-sex marriage, has developed over the past forty years. In October, 1971, the Supreme Court ruled that: "The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”

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

Gay marriage should not be recognized, similar to the opinion of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in the case of United States versus Windsor. Antonin Scalia argues, “The Court’s ruling in the United States versus Windsor would wrongly invalidate state efforts to limit lawful marriage to opposite-sex couples”. In this paper, I will explain the legal and constitutional reasoning on why same-sex marriage shouldn’t be legalized nationally.

In the past few decades, the question of allowing for same-sex marriage is a recurring topic of controversy. In the houses of same-sex couples, the need for equal rights is of great importance. Currently, many states ban the marriage of same-sex couples and do not view a marriage between same-sex couples as an official marriage. These states quote the Constitutional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Therefore, with this definition, the marriage of a man and a man or a woman and a woman is unconstitutional. As of the issue date of this article, the Supreme Court had not made a national decision on same-sex marriage and the benefits entitled to that marriage. This CQ Researcher journal focuses on the topic of

Same sex marriage is one of the most controversial trends that appear in the world today. In today’s society most of us are taught that a marriage should be a

There are many controversies surrounding today's world, such as abortion, animal testing, and social reform issues. It seems that no one can come to a common agreement on the legitimacy of these topics. Personal characteristics, such as upbringing, culture, religion and ethnicity, all play a role in determining one's feelings on a given controversial issue. However, one of the most protested and discussed issues in current political debate is same-sex marriage. There is no right or wrong answer to this question, only hard pressed arguments expressing speculation regarding supposed outcomes, benefits and possible tribulations that would come along with the endorsement of gay marriage. Such ideas are shown

On June 26, 2015 the Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality stating that all states must now recognize same-sex marriage (“Same-sex Marriage”). Some people opposed this ruling, saying that this type of law should be decided by state governments, and the federal government should not have the power to interfere. Many others opposed this on grounds of religion, saying that it ruined the sanctity of marriage (“Same-sex Marriage”). While both parties likely have intelligent and compelling arguments, put your own aside for the duration of this paper and instead look at the issue of same-sex from another perspective, that of a philosopher, Immanuel Kant.

This article discussed two opposing positions on whether or not same sex marriage should be legal. Theodore Olson argues for legal marriages while Lyle Denniston argues against. Theodore Olson viewpoint uses the US Constitution and the belief that all people are created equal as the support for his argument. He believes that same sex marriage is the natural evolution in equal rights and calls it “the last major civil-rights milestone yet to be surpassed in our two-century struggle” (McKee & Taverner, 2013, p. 118). Additionally he attempts to refute the justification behind California’s anti-gay marriage position. Specifically, he discredits the explanation of the tradition of husband and wife and the state’s interest in preserving procreation. As far as tradition he believes that traditions does not allow for progression or change and for procreation he argues that allowing same sex marriage would not reduce the number of heterosexual marriages and therefore would have not reduce the number of children. This sentiment was echoed by Justice

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

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

One of the most controversial issues around today is gay marriages. Many believe that the media is primly responsible for the idea of same-sex marriages, but when it all comes down to it there are really only two sides; those who support gay marriages, and those who oppose them. Two authors write their opinions on their opposite views on this issue. Sullivan (2002) supports same-sex marriages and believes marriage to be a universal right, not just restricted to heterosexuals. Contrary to Sullivan, Bennett (2002) believes that marriage is a sacred traditional family value that should be set aside for heterosexual couples. (2002)Throughout this essay, I will summarize both authors’ ideas and evaluate them through their evidence and

Taking an unprejudiced approach to the issue, this paper has analyzed arguments both in favor and against legalization of same-sex marriage. Many opponents of gay marriage remonstrate against any idea of its legalization, because homosexuals, they say, are far too incompetent to bring up children. Furthermore, they opine that homosexual parents are a menace to children. Also, opponents of same-sex marriage