Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage - Essay Example

Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage The United s is often known as the land of freedom, opportunity, and justice. However, same-sex marriage, oneof the most controversial issues in the United States, is currently illegal in most states. This is despite the fact that we have the separation of church and state, which emphasizes that establishing statutes must not be influenced by any kind of particular religious beliefs. We also have the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees equal privileges and legal benefits to both straight and gay citizens of the United States.

Thus, gay couples should have the same equal rights as straight couples do, including the right to be legally married, which can indeed bring many advantages to our society that oppose what some of its adversaries have tried to claim. When a state refuses or bans same-sex marriage, it is being discriminatory and is in violation of the 14th Amendment, which requires each state to provide equality in law for all of its people (Urbina). This includes marriage regardless of the genders of those in the couple.

California’s Proposition 8, a proposition that denies gay couples the right to marry, goes against the protection of equal rights that the 14th Amendment offers to all American citizens. Likewise, the 1st Amendment is also in violation when gay couples are denied marriage, as the amendment speaks for the separation of church and state (“Religion’s Role”). According to Geoffrey Stone, numerous polls have revealed that there is a strong correlation between the passing of Proposition 8 and particular religious beliefs.

In passing Proposition 8, religion should not have been taken into consideration or allowed influence over opinions. The most logical and obvious reason that people oppose same-sex marriage is because of religious beliefs and biblical arguments, which really are not enough to prove why gay marriages should not be allowed. No matter the sexual orientation that someone has, everyone deserves the right to marry anyone that they love and whomever they are attracted to. Though we may have gotten used to these biblical rules, only allowing straight couples to marry, we should not allow this to stop us from understanding the real situation regarding same-sex marriage and changing how things are.

After all, change is the only constant thing in this world. For example, the book of Leviticus in the Bible forbids tattoos, eating pork, and wearing different types of fabric at the same time, but all of these things have become legal in the eyes of the church. Outside of a church setting, slavery used to be a traditional institution in the past. However, we realized how narrow-minded these beliefs were and we did what we needed to change them; the same should be done for the sake of gay couples.

It is believed that homosexuality correlates with biological factors, as many studies have come to the conclusion that gay people are born gay and there is no way to fix or alter that aspect about them. Being homosexual is not considered a choice, but a natural trait, like being born with blue eyes. Just like using contacts to change one’s eye color, a gay person can pretend to not be gay or simply deny it; however, underneath those contacts, that person’s eyes are still blue. Pretending, denying, or not, a gay person is still gay.

God may have created only man and woman, but I believe that everything that has happened and will happen in the world has a purpose or a reason behind it. As such, a gay person is no different or any worse than a straight person in the eyes of God because God created every human being equally and with our own unique quirks and characteristics. Many people argue that same-sex marriages violate the sacred institution of marriage. In my opinion, I believe that divorces, polygamy, priest child molesters, sex before marriage, and abortions are more immoral than allowing a gay couple, who love each other and want the chance to have a stable family, to be legally married.

Violating the sacredness of marriage would be to go against marriage in a negative way. If anything, by allowing gay marriages to be legal, we would be embracing and expanding the sacredness of marriage. There are many things that violate the sanctity of marriage, but a gay couple is not one of them. In an article by David Blackenhorn, he states that the purpose of marriage is procreation (Blackenhorn). Though this may be the case for many couples, there are plenty of people who get married without wanting to have children.

Therefore, the purpose of their marriage is simply love. However, despite what Blackenhorn believes, I find the concept of marriage only being for procreation as biased and it does not sway my opinion for same-sex marriage. There are benefits of gay marriage for our society, our children, and our future generations that he did not recognize. Furthermore, by stating that marriage is only good for procreation, Blackenhorn is implying that same-sex marriages can threaten the human species because they cannot procreate.

However, our world is experiencing overpopulation, and same-sex marriages can help to solve this. These gay couples are able to have all the benefits of married life without increasing a problem taking place in our world. Furthermore, if gay couples were allowed to marry, they could adopt the children that so desperately need homes. These children have already grown up without proper families, and by letting same-sex couples to adopt them, not only would they be providing homes for these children, but they would also be promoting the importance of family values and integration (“Real Family”).

There are many benefits of same-sex marriage that can effect gay couples and society as a whole. The 14th and 1st Amendments of the United States Constitution are in favor of gay marriage, even if many religions are not. Gay people deserve the same right as straight people to get married since they want to do so for the sake of love. Everyone should have the chance of showing the rest of the world what another person means to them. In America, the land of the free, there should be nothing to prevent this.

Bibliography Blankenhorn, David. "Gay Marriage Harms Society." Social Justice. Ed. William Dudley. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2010. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 8 Apr. 2011. Opposing the idea of same-sex marriages and gay parenthood, Blackenhorn emphasizes that the vital purpose of marriage is for procreation and to give children the right to live in a stable and secure home environments, especially with their own biological parents. Even though he mentions that he is against homophobia, he implies that gay marriages will harm children’s right to live.

He uses statistics, facts, and expert views from anthropologist Helen Fisher, and philosopher and Nobel Laureate Bertrand Russell to support his position. The article contains strong-worded viewpoints and precise explanations about the disadvantages of gay marriages for children, but the evidence he brings forth is not enough to uphold his perspectives. Urbina, Ian. "Gay Marriage Is Legal in U.S. Capital." New York Times 03 Mar. 2010. 6 Apr. 2011. An article written to inform readers that Washington passed the law allowing same-sex marriage after advocates’ long struggle fighting for marriage equality.

Urbina movingly illustrates the different kinds of emotion behind that dramatic event by using same-sex couples’ testimonies regarding their most awaited achievement. Furthermore, he describes the adversaries’ attempts to protest that law, especially those Catholic charities. The article provides great information about same-sex couples’ perspective and some of the advantages of gay marriage legalization. "Real Family Values." New York Times 24 Mar. 2011: A30(L). Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 8 Apr. 2011. Since the Defense of Marriage Act is discriminatory and goes against the equality of human rights, President Obama had it ended.

Using excellent arguments and reasons, Obama makes it clear that same-sex couples are as deserving as straight couples for the rights of being married and the benefits that come with it. Unfortunately, lawmakers are still eager to appeal this decision, but the article has made it known that it will be a difficult feat as the Act is discriminatory no matter how someone looks at it. "Religion's Role in Gay Marriage Violates Separation of Church and State." How Does Religion Influence Politics? Ed. James D. Torr.

Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 8 Apr. 2011. Contends that Proposition 8 violates the separation of church and state by establishing law in accordance with particular religious belief. He concludes that there is no other reason behind this proposition. He agrees that religion can play a key role morally and ethically in society, but he emphasizes that religion should remain a private affair between individuals and it should not be used to abuse the power of State.

He uses statistics, facts, examples, and excellent reasoning to support his points. The editorial excellently provides concise explanation for the author’s opposition to applying religious beliefs and imposing laws like Proposition 8.