The Pros And Cons Of Same-Sex Marriage

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court Case Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) which nationally legalized same sex marriage, the religious right has felt that protections on religious liberty in this country have gone under attack. As the LGBTQ+ movement gains more traction in mainstream media, local municipalities, and even state governments, many religiously conservative states legislatures have begun to fight back by passing laws that protect a person’s right to discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community because of religious objections. While a person’s right to abstain from participating in a business transaction concerning a same sex marriage has been widely debated (and continues to be widely debate) for some time now, the new anti-transgender

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.

In the case of Jones v. Massachusetts, Michael Jones, an employee of the Sussex County, MA clerk’s office refused to issue a marriage liscense to a same sex couple based on his religious beliefs. His supervisor terminated him from his job, and issued the marriage liscense personally. Jones brought this termination to court as a violation of his first amendment right to religious freedom. The following is a compilation of the evidence and logic that supports not only that this claim is constitutionally valid, but that the precendents the court has set also approve this notion.

She argues that “framing gay marriage as a religious right suggests that the parties who are harmed by marriage laws discriminating against same-sex couples include not only the individual men and women in these relationships but also the churches who support gay marriage and their members, regardless of their sexual orientation”. Even though DeLaet wrote this before the Supreme Court ruling, her argument can still be applied to the rights that gays and lesbians face in society today. The LGTB community is still striving to find acceptance among business owners who discriminate against them because of their sexual orientation. These business owners cite the First Amendment and their right to express their religion freely and use it as a scapegoat to refuse service to homosexuals. However, with DeLaet’s argument, gays are also protected under the First Amendment because there are many religions that sanctify their union. The concept of freedom of religion cannot be used to grant right to one group of people while discriminating against

“Marco Rubio is running for President, pledging a constitutional amendments to define marriage between a man and a women, that scares me,” Pruter said. “Constitutional amendments are incredible hard to overturn so if that get passed that’s another fifty –sixty years that the LGBT community has been taken back.”

Most people believe that they deserve the rights they are granted by the government. An upstanding citizen who pays their taxes, serves their community and abides by the law should be afforded the rights of an American. However, not all citizens are afforded equal rights. Gay and lesbians are consistently denied rights that are typically taken for granted by the average American. Specifically, gay and lesbians couples are denied the right to marry even if they are upstanding citizens. They are held at an unfair disadvantage solely because of their sexual orientation. This discrimination must stop because gay and lesbian couples are law-abiding citizens too, who should be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples.

While seventeen states have already granted couples the right to marry whom they love regardless of gender, the rest of the country continues to forbid same-sex couples to marry (Ahuja) and in doing so, infringe upon one of the most basic freedoms we are allowed. Arguments for same-sex marriage, despite being backed up with hard legal evidence and Supreme Court rulings, continue to face opposition on the grounds of religious beliefs and personal values. Often cited by Catholics is an interpretation of marriage as “a promise made to God” and “a holy sacrament” that is only to be shared between one man and one woman. Other biblical interpretations suggest that a capital sin is committed by those in homosexual relationships and therefore must

When a person thinks about marriage, they usually think of a man and a woman. With more and more people getting married, it is all opening the door to gay marriage. No matter whom the person is, or what sex they chose to marry they should be treated the same. If a man and man want to unite in marriage and announce their love to each other, they should be able to and it should be accept in our society. If a female and another female are inmate it is considered arousing however, if those same woman want to make a commitment to each other it is then deemed unacceptable. Why should society be able to dictate who gets to marry whom, and how they get to live their lives?

Research has suggested that teenagers or young adults that are openly and not ashamed of being gay or lesbian have a better relationship with their parents, family and friends. When a person has support behind them it is always good for their self-esteem and mental health. Researchers believe that gays & lesbians always have a better chance at a happier well balanced life if they don’t have to hide their sexuality/ gender identity. When you are hiding the real you then suicidal feelings, substance abuse, and dangerous unprotected sex may occur. When teenagers/ young adults have a sense of comfort it definitely will help strengthen their character as a lesbian women or gay man. However if you have really religious strict parents who are reluctant to change then I don’t know if you should rush to tell your parents. It may bring more stress on than joy as crazy as that may sound. Everybody can’t handle the truth even when it’s right in their face. I believe that people are more understanding of gay and lesbian people in 2017 however some parents still disapprove of their children when they come out. Some parents kick their children out of the house, stop helping them out financially, turn cold towards them or even become violent. Teenagers & young adults who contemplating out may have a hard time handling others reaction.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Constitution guarantees a right to same-sex marriage. Yet, same-sex marriage continues to be a highly debated issue that leaves our society searching for answers. This has been very apparent during elections when politicians, in order to distract or sway conservative voters, all took a side and had an opinion on the issue of same-sex marriage. The debate has been presented on the left as a civil rights debate, equal rights. And on the right, as a morals debate, a referendum on homosexuality (Rauch, J. 2004). Everyone has an opinion on whether two men or two women should be allowed to get married, and in doing so, have all the same rights granted by the federal government to them as

Same sex marriage has been around for a considerable length of time, in daily papers, on TV and in the present neighborhood news: gay marriage. It most likely is a moral issue and the quandary indicates us two sides: individuals are either for gay marriage or they are against gay marriage. Law can sanction gay marriage and if not, discipline in prison could be the subsequent stage. What's more, that is the place the moral predicament begins. Every single person have certain requirements in life, these necessities could contrast per singular, so as a regularly acknowledged model there is the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. This model depicts the essential human needs which additionally expresses that the most fundamental needs should be met before alternate needs can be satisfied. The primary needs are the physiological needs. These requirements incorporate sustenance, water, the fundamentals to survive. Once these necessities are met whatever is left of the models needs can be satisfied as far as possible up to self-completion. In the middle of physiological and self-realization is another progression that should be satisfied: love and a feeling of having a place. Love of family and companions or the human requirement for enthusiastic and sexual connections. One case in this progression could be marriage. Hetero couples can address this issue without an issue. In any case, if gay people are not permitted to wed lawfully, does this imply gay people are not permitted to satisfy

Over time, society’s beliefs over human rights have changed dramatically. For example, interracial marriage was first declared constitutional and a basic right of all individuals during 1967. Decades previous to this year, it was considered taboo to interfere with the purity of one’s race. However, people eventually grew to accept that individuals of separate races can develop a loving relationship and should be able to express their feelings to the world. Nowadays, Americans, along with other people around the globe, are beginning to welcome the idea that individuals of the same gender can develop strong, loving bonds as well. Nonetheless, a portion of the population of the United States believes that the definition of marriage is “… the intimate union and equal partnership of a man and a woman” (“Meaning and Purpose”). Individuals with this belief have been attempting to elect government officials with the ability to suggest laws that forbid same-sex marriage such as a proposed amendment, which failed to pass in 2004, that declared that a marriage was to be composed of a man and a woman. Same-sex matrimonies and the definition of marriage have caused wide controversy, the establishment of supportive and opposing groups, and the formation of different thoughts over the topics that amendments should cover.

The decade-long issue on legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states is up for debate. Originally the justices were avoiding hearing appeals about same-sex marriage being allowed in five states. Then number of states gradually increased to 19, 24, and then 36. Gay rights activists are finally making a dent in this decade-long issue. As one said, “We are finally within sight of the day when same-sex couples across the country will be able to share equally in the joys, protections and responsibilities of marriage” (Davidson). Sources say that because of previous rulings the court will rule in favor of same-sex marriage. The two main concerns on this debate are whether congress must require states to give marriage licenses to the couples and if that is not the case. Do they have to recognize same-sex marriages that were performed in other states?

Lesbian and gays’ (LG) have endured discrimination for many years with at least 20,000 same sex couples in Australia, still suffering discrimination in their every day life (Human rights, 2013). However, their rights in Australia have gradually progressed since the 20th century, with LG’s rights being recognised more in politic genders. People who identify their sexual interest as LGBT in 2016 have almost the same amount of rights as Heterosexuals, except for marriage. Although Australia rights for LG has advanced, the country is still far behind its neighbouring western countries such as Ireland, New Zealand that have made the push to legalise gay marriage. This essay will analyse the changes of rights same sex couples have experienced over time and how they have advanced. It will explore the hypothesis to find a suitable conclusion, do ’Same sex couples today have greater rights than they did in previous generations.’

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.