The Evolution of Same-Sex Marriage

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.

In summary of these, the Obergefell V Hodges has received opposition as well as propositions at different degrees, but the majority of the debaters’ are the proposing side. The main idea here was to legalize the Same-sex marriage which had been prohibited in the previous court rulings (Siegel, 2015). The proposing team was emphasizing on the following factors; the right to personal choices as clarified in the human dignity, the right to intimate association, marriage as a foundation of the American social order and the ability to sustain and safeguard children and families (Siegel, 2015).

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.

Learning family advocacy requires students to develop an understanding of contemporary cultural issues surrounding traditional marriage. The struggle over defining marriage was thought to be somewhat settled through the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA); however, as this law’s ramifications were realized, greater debate resulted about the moral, philosophical, and civic repercussions of this legal definition. This paper will provide a better understanding of the historical and worldview changes that occurred within the United States over homosexuality and same-sex marriage (SSM). After gaining a better understanding of these issues, the paper will also provide an exploration of the strengths and weaknesses of DOMA from these differing perspectives. In addition, recommendations will be offered for further changes of law and advocacy that would encourage the altering of current thought intent on stifling the defense of traditional marriage.

It is true that marriage in this nation traditionally has been regarded as a relationship exclusively between a man and a woman, and many of our nation’s multiple religions define marriage in precisely those terms. But with the Supreme Court has always previously considered marriage in that context, the underlying rights and liberties that marriage embodies are not in any way confined to heterosexuals. One’s sexuality is not a preference, it is immutable, unchangeable, and the Constitution protects us all against prejudices and discrimination based on immutable differences. Not only is not allowing same-sex couples to marry discriminatory, it also makes gays second class citizens. When we as a nation refuse to accord the same marital status to gays and lesbians, we discourage same-sex couples from forming the same relationships we encourage for others, and we are essentially telling gays, those of who love them, and society as a whole that their relationships are less worthy, less legitimate, less permanent and less valued. By not legalizing same-sex marriages the US demeans their relationships and demeans gays as individuals. Same-sex marriages must be legalized.

In the summer of 2015, history was made in the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court had made, with a 5-4 majority, a controversial ruling decreeing that denying equal recognition to same-sex couples was in violation of the Equal Protections Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Those on the minority cited concerns of judicial restraint, the connection between marriage and procreation, and whether or not marriage is a Constitutional issue in the first place. Nevertheless, equal recognition for same-sex couples became the law of the land.

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.

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

Elizabeth Schroeder’s book, Taking Sides, looks at opposing views on controversial issues, one of which is legalizing same-sex marriage. In their article, “Talking About the Freedom to Marry: Why Same-Sex Couples Should Have Equality in Marriage,” the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund supports same-sex marriage. An opposing view, is given by Robert P. George, a Princeton University professor. In his article, “The 28th Amendment: It Is Time to Protect Marriage, and Democracy, in America,” he explains why he is against same-sex marriage.

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

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

Same sex- marriage is still the topic of many peoples conversation across the country. Citizens, divided by politic party, are very passionate about how they feel about it. The president didn’t approve of it at first, but now he finally accepts same- sex marriage, the Judicial System uses its power to dictate to the States, forcing them to accept same- sex marriage. Both houses of Congress continue to debate what marriage means.

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

Sam Schulman’s “The Worst Thing About Gay Marriage” presents an interesting argument against gay marriage that hinges upon maintaining a traditional form of marriage. He actually claims that gay marriage is “unnecessary”(381). According to Schulman, there are 4 primary effects of marriage within his definition he calls the kinship system. First, marriage protects and controls a woman’s sexuality. Second, the possible pairings are limited by the kinship system to avoid incest or other taboos. Third, marriage creates a situation where licit sex can occur. Fourth, it places a clear divide between childhood innocence and adult, married, life. All of which is in addition to maintaining a standard family hierarchy, in which a marriage almost