The Pros and Cons of Gay Marriage

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.

The debate on whether the constitution should be changed to allow gays/lesbians legal status, whereby the partners are protected while in the institution of marriage is a heated debated which has been ongoing in many years. There are those states whereby the rights of gays/lesbians to have legal marriages have been recognized, but in most of the states their right to legal marriage have not been recognized. This essay looks at the reasons why the American constitution should be amended to ensure that all states across the United States recognizes the rights of gays/lesbians to have legal marriages. The argument will focus on the impact that lack of legal marriages have on the gay and lesbian partners and the reasons why constitutional amendment can only be the best solution to resolve the issues of the rights for the gay community to a legal 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

This essay will approach the topic above mentioned, examining some of the arguments that people have given in order to support gay marriage and on the other hand, some of the ideas given to criticize this type union.

Words panned across the bottom of the screen and my young brain was filled with these negative preconceived notions about homosexuality and same sex marriage. Sitting on the edge of my parent’s bed, I was enthralled by the Fox News’s coverage over the topic of legalizing same sex marriage. Right then was first time I truly became aware of the social issue but I was too young to formulate my own opinion; I didn’t know enough about the topic so I trusted the authority of the show. By the time the segment wrapped up, the idea of homosexuality and having same sex parents seemed weird to me. These people must just be weird. I never met someone who was homosexual, and at that point I wasn’t planning on it.

My definition of marriage is a male and female fell in love, living together, have their

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?

The controversy between same sex marriage and religious beliefs has been a reoccurring issue in the United States over the past few years. Not only are religion and same sex marriage controversial issues alone, but there is a direct correlation between the two that makes the situation even stickier than before.

On June 26th, 2015, the Supreme Court established, in Obergefell v. Hodges, that no law in the United States could bar a same-sex couple from getting married. The court decided that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitutions Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses guaranteed marriage as a right for same-sex couples. The First Amendment protects the freedom of religion in the United States and has been used widely to protect the actions and beliefs of religious individuals in discriminating against LGBTQIA+ individuals. In the United States, there are a plethora of religions some of whom reject same-sex marriage as part of their sincerely held religious beliefs. One such group is the Southern Baptist Convention, who after Obergefell v. Hodges, reaffirmed their beliefs that same-sex marriage violates their religious principles. In August of 2015, the Windsor family, owners of a cake shop and members of the Southern Baptist Convention church, denied a same-sex couple a wedding cake due to their personal religious beliefs. The couple brought a suit against the cake shop claiming that they were being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation which could violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. In this essay, I will argue that the Windsors are not justified under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act or the First Amendment in discriminating against the same-sex couple and that there is no form of democratic deliberation

Coming out as a homosexual is tough task in and of itself. If you come to this realization after you already have a family, it becomes even harder. At this point, your decision no longer just affects you. Embracing your true identity has the potential to shatter your loved ones lives. It can be very hard for your children grasp or understand how somebody who married the other gender can be a homosexual. Your significant other, the person who you were supposed to love unconditionally, now has to try to cope with the idea that the person she married no longer finds her romantically attractive. One can only imagine the gossip about yourself that will be spread around the community and workplace.

Sex is one of the most natural activities we as humans do. Yes, physically sex can be very pleasurable but, it can be a way for two people to come together to connect intimately in a way that talking cannot do. Sex between a heterosexual couple is completely natural but homosexual sex is not? What sets the standards for what is natural and what is unnatural? Standards based on the opinions of people mean many of the things we do are unnatural. In America, seeking medical assistance is the natural thing to do when sick while in other places across the world, holistic medicine is what is normally done when sick. Therefore, what is deemed natural and unnatural based on cultural and individual norms is not a valid argument against homosexuality. Diverting from the societal norms does not make something unnatural just different. There are many things that do people do that are not considered normal. Would we consider riding a unicycle wrong because not that many people do it? The answer is no. Morality is not based on what’s considered usual but what’s best for everyone. In this paper I will be defending Corvino’s defense of homosexuality. Homosexuality is at the very least natural. When people are born and grow up being attracted to someone of the opposite sex it is considered normal, so why do people believe homosexuality is unnatural? Isn’t it just the same thing in reverse?

It is difficult to say whether we still live in a heteronormative world as there are valid arguments for both sides. From what I have observed, most people still believe that heterosexuality is the norm, but I also believe that many people no longer view homosexuality as something negative. While homosexuality is not the standard sexuality, it is becoming more accepted due to that fact that it is now more common for gay people, bisexuals, and transgenders to inform others of their sexual orientation and communicate their stories and experiences.

“What does love mean to you?” Edie Windsor asked. It meant the world to her, so much that she stood up to the United States to recognize her marriage like others, and not differently because her and her partner are the same sex. Under federal tax law, a spouse who dies can leave her assets, for example family home, to the other spouse without incurring estate taxes.

Despite being members of the LGBTQ community, the concerns of transsexuals remains different than the concerns of homosexuals. Author Kate Bornstein believes lesbians and gays are fortunate to have a community where each member can relate to each other, but “the transgendered experience is different” (Bornstein 67). Homosexuality and heterosexuality remains on a system where people are assigned a gender at birth and live with this specific gender while seeking others based on their partners’ genders. Are homosexuals still attack in public for their preferences? Absolutely. They are able, however, to form groups based similar backgrounds and desires to another member. As a straight female, I was born comfortable with societal expectations of my assigned gender, although I can see how others may be uncomfortable with theirs. I act feminine when I feel like it and sometimes I practice some masculine habits. I seek partners that I feel are masculine and aligned with my definition of a male. In the end, I go to my bed at night believing a match all the imaginary criteria of being a female. I do this despite never stopping to think if I have proof that what I believe is the definition of a female really the definition of a female. In this sense, how is a cis lesbian different from me? She was assigned a female gender and she lived with that gender. She can debate with me how she practice her gender roles and who her lovers are to her, but it is a similar story. If she dress

Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee may have to change their views on gay marriage after this supreme court case. On April 28, 2015 a supreme court case was issued by Obergefell v. Hodges. This case stated that gay marriage should be allowed in the following states, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. These individuals are fourteen same sex couples and two men whose same-sex partners are deceased. They filed suits in Federal District Courts in their home States. These same sex couples argue that state officials violate the Fourteenth Amendment by denying them the right to marry or to have marriages lawfully performed. The Fourteenth Amendment states that everyone has the right to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Fourteenth Amendment requires the States to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State.