The Rights Of Gay And Lesbian Couples : The Union Between A Man And A Lady

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.

Out of five key Supreme Court rulings, Obergefell v. Hodges was selected to be evaluated in this piece. The ban on same sex marriage is the law being challenged in the case. According to the case study, “groups of same-sex couples sued their relevant state agencies in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee to challenge the constitutionality of those states' bans on same-sex marriage…” (Oyez, 2014).

The Obergefell V. Hodeges case and some other cases are related and it is important to give a brief history. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision in United States v. Windsor, that is was unconstitutional for the Defense of Marriage Act to define marriage as being solely between a man and a woman. In turn, this decision ruled same-sex to be constitutional. As one can predict with such a controversial issue as gay marriage, the push back against this decision from various states was immense. States all across the country showed just how opposed they were to the Supreme Courts decision when their state governments chose to ban same-sex marriage regardless of the decision,

The problem with the issue of gay marriage is being faced across the country. This issue has grown in popularity as we have progressed through our stages of taboo to acceptance of gays and their lifestyle. The media and remodels have expressed their acceptance of the issue by exploring the lifestyle and publicizing it. Now California has moved to the forefront of modern attempts to eliminate the codified restrictions on their life. With a high gay population and being one of the most populated states California has been the foreground for the step to make gay marriage deemed unconstitutional.

In “A Gay Man’s Case Against Gay Marriage” by Michael Bronski – a gay rights activist and professor of gay and lesbian studies at Dartmouth - Bronski argues that homosexuals are too focused on the legalization of gay marriage. He begins this article with his involvement and knowledge of gay rights and history. Then, he discusses the fact that marriage itself is problematic regardless of sexual orientation and that the gay community has developed healthier relationships without the need for marriage. Although, he is in complete support of the gay community to get this right and get the benefits that come along with it; He disagrees that it’s a necessity and the biggest problem facing lesbians and gays. In this article Bronski does fail to mention the 50% of marriages that prosper, abuse and adultery that occurs outside of marriage. He also doesn’t mention how the civil benefits affect marriages negatively or positively. Ensuring tax breaks, loans and inheritance arrangements for unwedded people can be very problematic. Although, he makes valid point on how the civil benefits should be available to all. He doesn’t go into depth about how problematic this could be. Bronski doesn’t go into how the same things can happen outside of marriage.

MSgt Abbott’s time giving back to her community is a passion of hers. She sees herself as a leader and advocate for those who need help, support, or deserve to be treated fairly. Her community activities include volunteering as a blood drive assistant for the American Red Cross and her role within the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transsexual (LGBT) community. MSgt Abbott’s presence and intellect, as well as a lot of courage, empowered her to combine the two things she is most passionate about. She is that type of NCO that embodies what an NCO should be at all times and is a courageous advocate of equal rights for the LGBT community. However, her voice was finally able to be herd after the repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’. This freedom allowed her to play a major role within the LGBT community, as well as represent the LGBT community within the Air

Through paralleling the success of gay rights with the more recent successes secured for marriage equality, one can pin point the steps necessary to create successful political mobilization within a conservative political system. A key point to understand the success of political mobilization is the political logic, or “background set of assumptions about how society works” (Armstrong 2002:14). Political logics drive the transformation of movement organization and social change. Only through the creation of new political logics can mobilization occur. Yet, “New political logics cannot simply be created at will through the strategic framing efforts of activist, but only emerge under specific conditions of heightened cultural creativity” (Armstrong

This paper will examine problem on how states are not regulating same sex marriage law passed in the United States. I will explains certain areas in the united states where the government has yet to fully enforced the law for legalization of same sex marriage since its official decision on June 26, 2015 while in fact many states have done everything in their power to prevent homosexuals from expressing their new constitutional right. In the following I will talk about certain a state and its government official in power trying to get the legislation to reconsider their current decision. I will also speak about 2 court cases which give us the current nationwide act of same sex marriage; Obergefell v. Hodges and United States v. Windsor. Although there are far more cases on the subjects they have had influences that have not had as major contribution as these two cases have had. I will recommend three policies that would help the LGBT community regarding their union right; stricter establishment of enforcing the law, reinforcing the separation of church and state, and educating the community on the benefits of same sex marriage.

The LGBT community has made new laws each day to bring equality to all. “Throughout its, America has symbolized equality of opportunity for people of all races, origins, religions and creeds, serving as a beacon of hope for anyone seeking a better life. However, despite its founding principles of equality and acceptance, the United States also has a long history of denying basic rights to certain people” (LGBT Equality). When the US discriminates against a certain thing people retaliate and rise up and try to make new laws to help their cause. The LGBT community has been striving to bring equality in many ways. The LGBT community has made great strides in gaining equality of same-sex marriage, gay adoption, and transgender equality.

Abandoned in a dumpster at five months old, little Freddie started out life on the streets. After being found and rescued by a garbage truck driver, Freddie was bounced around from foster home to foster home. By 1999, when he was four years old, he had been a part of twelve different families in three states. The future looked very bleak for Freddie until a young, ambitious couple came along. Nevertheless, although they were looking to adopt Freddie, the adoption agency told the couple that they had to be married. The problem was they could not get married. John Baxter and Jeff Forshay are at the forefront of a fight staged by gay and lesbian activists to get the government to permit same-sex marriages. Activists say this is just part of their hard-fought battle for public acceptance; the movement has gone on for at least twenty years. At the same time, remarkable transformations have changed the general makeup of the typical family in the United States: “[T]he traditional family model, . . . in which the father is the only breadwinner for his wife and their biological children, comprised a majority of U.S. families in the 1950s. Today, however, almost three-quarters of families are classified as ‘nontraditional’” (“Same-Sex Marriage” 1-2). Many of today’s married couples both work and receive benefits not generally available to unmarried couples. Marriage, however, is not an option for people like John and Jeff. Although not currently permitted under the United States

Traditionalist associations that claim to uphold "conventional family values" have guaranteed to dispatch an across the country battle in 1998 to institute state-level enactment to deny reception by lesbians and gay men. These dangers of against gay and hostile to youngster enactment have come because of the expanded readiness of courts, policymakers and administrators to perceive that lesbians and gay men can be great folks and ought to be assessed on their child rearing aptitudes, instead of their sexual introduction. The late settlement of an ACLU claim in New Jersey, where the State consented to permit lesbian and gay couples to receive under the same benchmarks connected to wedded couples, has expanded the conservative 's attention on this issue.

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

Gay marriage is marriage involving two persons of the same sex is a man and a man or a woman and a woman. It can be seen as a phrase that is used by the Government, social and religious groups to have the recognition of marriage between two persons of the same sex. There is a social movement, so that people can get their rights and responsibilities in countries like the United States of America. Legal issues involved in this type of marriage have been made to the procedures of the federal Government in the traditional system, the federal Government had no attempt to have the meaning of marriage and, therefore, he had the idea that any marriage that was appreciated by the State, has also been known by the federal Government, even if there was a problem of recognition of such marriages from other States. This means that the State was responsible for the enforcement of rights that people need so that people can have their partner through the Act. The defense of marriage act and then people quickly find how issues that had to be met, and that might work and it did only definition that a marriage could be a Union between a man and a woman. Therefore, there is no company that has the recognition for this same sex as those who had pushed for legalization of sex type. (Justin, 1990)

A homosexual couple is a pair of two individuals of the same sex involved in an intimate and loving relationship. Homosexual couples want to be treated the same way as heterosexuals by fighting for their right to get married and also their right to have children. Because of the nature of their relationship, they cannot biologically have children together so their only option is to adopt. The debate over homosexual couples being able to adopt children is very controversial and is becoming a big issue in today’s society. Some believe that by allowing these couples to adopt, they intentionally deprive the children from either a male or female role models; the children will have more challenges in school compared to those raised by heterosexual couples; and, children will tend to have more homosexual behaviors themselves because of what they are exposed to at home.

Advice to a U.S. State Senator on whether natural law might determine whether passing a statute prohibiting same-sex marriage is an appropriate legislative act?