The Debated Issue of Same-Sex Marriage

Gay marriage, something that has increasingly been on the news, is talked about in chapter five. Lambda Legal Defense eve talks about how they will enforce gay marriage through the manipulation of the courts. The whole trend started in 1996 in Hawaii, with a ruling there saying theres no reason to ban gay civil marriages. The biggest problem, is that this is not the job of the Supreme Court Justices to decide, but elected representatives. In 20 years, the Supreme court has decided in two cases addressing constitutionality of state sodomy in Bowers v. Hardwick and Lawrence v. Texas. In Romers v. Evans, it ruled on a state constitution amendment. William F. Buckley wrote a response where in summary he is declaring the Supreme Court has no right to be in the bedroom of Americans. Having government involved in any personal matter is hazardous. “The debate over which branch of government gets to decide how, when, and why it can be there(Levin.73)” this is saying that the government will enforce themselves in our privacy on other issues besides gay relationships and contraceptives. New York times ran an article talking about sodomy laws, and how they are rarely enforced due to not being able accurately prove anything, and also the time it would take to search for violators. In Bowers V. Hardwick an Atlanta police officer went to Hardwick’s house with a warrant for ticket violations, and found Hardwick with another man in his bedroom. Hardwick was put in jail for 12 hours, with the

As this semester has come to a close we reach the inevitable end question, “what is truth.” This is a question which many of the authors we have read works from have differing opinions of. Through reading the works and listening to lectures through this semester I have come to the conclusion that truth is essentially whatever the person who is thinking about it decides that it should be. The people that decide what their form of truth is usually get it from people which have some type of power over them. We use these people which have a form of power over us to help decide what our own truths are and how we will go about enacting them. Christians for example do not believe in gay marriage. It is not part of their truth and most likely never will be. This is because they believe in the bible, and a god (higher power) which tells them that gay marriage is wrong. They use this information to decide what their truth is and how they will live out their lives. On the flip side of this there are many people who were raised, or influenced by people who are completely fine with gay marriage therefore those people whom they influence (the people I spoke of originally) also have that “truth” that gay marriage is fine. The thing that makes this important is the way in which both sides of this spectrum will defend their truth, and act as though it is the correct truth. When everything is essentially boiled down and looked at, truth is nothing more than an opinion one holds. Even things

There is presently much controversy regarding homosexuals and whether or not it would be wrong for society to accept marriages between same-sex couples. The masses express confusion regarding the homosexual community and individuals are generally inclined to discriminate homosexuals. While some consider that marriage is not actually an important thing and it is irrelevant whether or not a gay couple unites through official means, recent events show otherwise and it is apparently very important for a homosexual couple to have access to the institution of marriage in order for both of its members to be provided with a series of rights that are normally beneficial in the case of heterosexual couples.

Contemporary moral disputes are constantly ongoing around the world and in the United States. For hundreds of years marriage has been defined as the legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman as partners in a relationship. Up until relatively recently the debate on gay marriage has not been a popular topic. Gay marriage has been illegal in the US and most countries around the world up until the early 2000s.[1] The debate on gay marriage has grown with more and more people publicly speaking and giving their opinions on it, especially in the Unites States.

Same sex marriage has been widely looked down upon for ages. People say, “It’s not the traditional constitutional marriage”, or “Children need a mother and a father”. It honestly doesn’t matter. If two people love each other, they should be allowed to marry. It’s just as simple as that. What other reason do you need? If two complete strangers of the same sex want to be together for the rest of their lives, we should let them.First, denying some people to marry is discriminatory. Judge Sarah Zabel of Miami-Dade Circuit Court ruled the gay marriage ban of Florida unconstitutional. She stated that it, “serves only to hurt, to discriminate, to deprive same-sex couples and their families of equal dignity, to label and treat them as 2nd class citizens, and to deem them unworthy of participation in one of the fundamental institutions of our society.” In other words, you’re looking down upon same sex couples that want to get married as if they’re lower than you; that they don’t deserve the same rights as us. Same sex couples would be able to enjoy the same benefits as heterosexual couples if they were able to be married.Furthermore, the General Accounting Office made an assessment in 2004 about the benefits that heterosexual married couples have that same sex couples could not. Some of these benefits include hospital visitation during an illness and the option of filing a joint tax return to reduce a tax burden. Imagine not being able to see your significant other in the hospital

Gay marriage is one right that homosexuals are struggling to maintain. Gay marriage is only legal in a portion of the states in America today. The main argument against gay people being allowed to legally marry is religion. Marriage is a religious act and is referred to in the Bible. The Bible also states that “...you shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination,” (Leviticus 18:22). Therefore people that strongly follow the Bible often say that marriage is between a man and a woman because that is the way that God intended it; however, that also raises the fact that we live in the United States of America, and in this country people have the right to follow any religion they want, if any at all. The Bill of Rights declares “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” (The Bill of Rights). Legally people have the right to follow any religion they please, so why should the United States’ laws be controlled by the restrictions and ideals of one specific religion. Not everyone follows the religion of Christianity and because we live in America they don’t have to. In some religions, it is socially

There are 1049 legal reasons why gay couples would want marital status to be recognized by the government. There are also 1049 rights intend for same-sex couples, these rights include: “hospital care choices for yourself and your partner; power of attorney for you and your partner; right to visit your partner in the ICU; rights to retirement plan decisions; rights to survivor benefits from social security, and the list continues.” (TPF Student Action). The US Supreme Court on June 26th, 2015 ruled that the US Constitution grant the right for same-sex couples to marry in all of the 50 states in the US. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy stated in the majority opinion: "The court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. No longer may this liberty be denied to them."(CNN) There are many conservatives that are completely against the idea of gay marriage and they have stated that “they will fight to have the Supreme Court ruling overturned.” Politicians with a Christian background stated that homosexuality is an “abomination to defend their religious arguments.”(CNN) A rule, the United States set up from the beginning, states that “separation needs to be made between religion and government.” With the controversy of gay marriage, lines begin to get blurred and religion starts to influence the government’s mind.

Marriage is both a civic and religious institution, and the question of whether the state should be able to regulate marriage is hence quite interesting. On the one hand, America believes in a separation of church and state. On the other, it believes in freedom and equality, and to uphold these for same-sex couples in the form of same-sex marriage, it would have to interfere with the religious institution of marriage. I believe that same-sex couples should have every right to get married, because married couples receive a number of federal and state benefits, and denying these benefits to someone because of their sexuality goes against the ideal of equality. Several of the arguments against same-sex marriage tend to be moralistic or religious. Some say that same-sex marriage brings disadvantages to the children that come from these marriages. However, same-sex couples are more likely to adopt than heterosexual couples, and their children tend to fare equally well socially as compared to children of heterosexual couples (whatweknow.com). If a religious group does choose to discriminate against a group of people, this discrimination should not reflect in political institutions that claim to be separate from the state. In my opinion, marriage as a civic institution should be accessible to any two consenting adults, regardless of factors like sex, race, and class.

Same-sex marriages should be recognized as legal marriages and should be given the same legal status, rights and protections that are given to traditional marriages between a man and a woman. In the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case, Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, the Court held that “there is no reasonable relationship between a ban [on gay marriage] and the protection of public health, safety, or public welfare.” A ban on gay marriage is “impermissibly based on private prejudice against homosexuals.” In addition, a ban against same-sex marriage discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation. I wholeheartedly agree with what the Court held in this case.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Should gay marriages be legal? Why should our nation accommodate such a dreadful Supreme Court ruling? Gay couples have become a major problem for our children. Children only repeat what they hear, see, and other habits from their role models. Our children are the ones who are being subjected to these horrifying situations.

One of the most reasons that legalization of the same-sex marriage is equality of civil rights. Civil rights are the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality (Oxford dictionaries 2015). People deserve their rights which are permitted by government. Law-abiding citizens who pay their taxes and serve the community should be guaranteed the rights equally under the law. However, not all the citizens are assured equal rights. In some way, some people are denied their rights by government, especially, same-sex couples who want to get marriage, even they are upstanding citizens. Because of sexual orientation, they are treated unfairly by government and people. It is also discrimination. This discrimination should be stop because same-sex couples are eligible for having same rights as heterosexual couples.

Within the past few decades, as society has been adapting to various cultural changes, traditional values have come into contest with more liberal values. One of the most prevalent examples of this is the ongoing debate over the legalization of same-sex marriage within America. In the article “Supreme Court should make gay marriage a national right” by the editorial staff at the Boston Globe, the importance of the upcoming Supreme Court ruling on same sex marriage was stressed because it is a topic that has been dodged thus far. While numerous federal circuit courts have ruled on this issue, some in favor and some opposed, the legal dispute of whether the decision should be left up to the state democratic process will finally be settled. Through looking at previous key rulings in the cases Zablocki v. Redhail and Loving v. Virginia, the editorial argued in favor of same-sex marriage based on the precedence that the Supreme Court has determined marriage as a fundamental right that should be uniform across the country and equally available for every individual. However, while the editorial staff asserts this right of marriage as an institution through those precedent cases, they do not go far enough to justify why the selected court cases extend to same sex marriage, why marriage is a fundamental right, and why this issue has been so controversial in the court of law.

Often, the proponents of same sex-marriages are those individuals who personally gay. They base their argument in their supposed orientation to same-sex attraction. According to these individuals, this orientation is inborn and consequently involuntary. That being the case, they argue that the only way they can lead happy and actualized lives is only if they are able to pursue exploit their sexuality in the way they are oriented. Given that, they have a claim to human rights, like every other person who is not gay; they claim that any restriction to their formalizing of gay marriages is contemptuous to the inalienable nature of their rights.

The outline of the articles is to highlight the important factors which exist in the research of studies focusing on same-sex and heterosexual couples and the challenges they experience with bringing up children. The main focus of the articles is to draw on the conclusion on same-sex couples. When dealing with families of same sex marriages you must put into consideration how families are the same and different from traditional families. In today 's society many of same-sex couples are confronted with social irregular characteristics which may cause many complex issues. The main point is to offer concrete evidence as a powerful influence for inquiries raised by women’s activist and scholars who have contended that the sanctioning of same-sex marriages will fortify the heteronormative establishment of conventional marriage (Lannutti, 2005). I will begin by providing a survey of the inquiries of sociology highlighting the similitudes and contrasts between same-sex and ordinary hetero connections and families. Researchers and supporters of the same-sex marriage concur that the legal ramifications of same-sex marriage should not revolve simply around hetero couples but rather the overcoming of challenges by all couples. The most recent couple of years there have been a great deal of civil debates over same-sex unions and their children and the worry of their family structure 's impact on them (Lannutti, 2005). The literature on family structure has been centered on basic

The Issue with Same Sex Marriage has been debated for over a decade and we have seen conflicts of concerns regarding the rights of homosexuals. Do they have the right to same sex marriage? First must look for the level of definition from the word marriage. We must first look at the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), in which it states that marriage is defined as a union between one man and one woman. On July 18th, 2006, the Congressional voted on the proposed Amendment that befell onto the House of Representative in which it fall short on voters from 236 to 187. In this discussing with same sex marriage I will elaborate why most Americans believe that it is an abomination against the Constitution and the First Amendment. On the other hand, people like our current national leader, President Obama fought for the civil rights of the homosexuals. I will elaborate cases like: Baehr v Lewin Gay Marriage of Hawaii Supreme Court and United States v Windsor of the Supreme Court. I will also discuss what the Constitution says about gay marriage.