I Now Pronounce You Free To Marry

Why Gay People Should Have the Right to Marry

6/9/2011 Talha Khan

Talha Khan 2

I Now Pronounce You Free To Marry

Marriage is defined as the joining of two adults into a union, in which they promise to love and care for each other as long as they live. This definition has been debated for decades in the United States Legislature. It began in 1942 with the Supreme Court case Skinner V Oklahoma. In this case, The Supreme Court ruled that marriage is one of the basic civil rights. Then in 1967, in Loving V Virginia, the Supreme Court declared that: "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men" (Same-Sex 1). In addition, in 1999 the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that same sex couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexual couples (Same-Sex 2). Additionally, in 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution required equality in marriage for same sex couples and heterosexual couples so on May 17th, 2004, Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same sex couples (Same-Sex 2). However amidst the tolerations, there was also some opposition to the legalization of same sex marriage. During the 1970s, when gay and lesbian couples tried to register for marriage licenses, they were rejected, and to add insult to injury when they tried to sue, their lawsuits were rejected as well (Same-Sex 2). Then in 1996, Hawaii amended its Constitution in order to block same sex marriages. Next in 2001, while the Netherlands legalized same sex marriage, there were seven same sex couples who were denied marriage licenses in Massachusetts (SameSex 2). Also, ever since 2002 to 2006, opponents of same sex marriage have tried to get a Federal Marriage Amendment passed. If it was passed, the amendment would have defined

Talha Khan 3

marriage as the union of one man and one woman. In addition, various religions consider same sex marriage to be a: faithful, exclusive and lifelong union between one man and one woman. But despite all of these opinions, there are advocates who believe that same sex marriage should be legalized because it would uphold Constitutional values as well as moral values. Legalization of same sex marriage would uphold the values of the Constitution. According to an article, Marriage is considered a civil right, not a religious right (Bond 3). The article also says that: Public officials place their hands on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution. But they dont place their hands on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible (Bond 4). So officials swear to uphold the supreme law of the land, not the Ten Commandments. Next, Capello states that the Constitution should protect homosexuals not discriminate against them, for he says that: The U.S Constitution was forged to protect minorities like us from the whims and fears of the (heterosexual) majority when it comes to fundamental rights such as marriage (Capello 22). Furthermore, The Supreme Court of Massachusetts claims that: Same sex unions would have the effect of maintaining and fostering a stigma of exclusion that the Constitution prohibits. In addition he retorted that the State Constitution of Massachusetts affirms the equality of all individuals, upholds the dignity of all individuals, and forbids the creation of second class citizens. So the legalization of same sex marriage would uphold the values of the Constitution by protecting the rights of the homosexual and treating them as equals. Next, the legalization of same sex marriage would grant equality to all homosexuals. According to Bond, sexuality is like race, for its a condition that people are born with and cannot change (Bond 1). In addition he states that sexuality isnt a preference because its immutable and unchangeable, and that the Constitution protects against all prejudices based on immutable differences (Bond 5). He then goes on to say that gays and lesbians have fought

Talha Khan 4

alongside everyone else during the civil rights movement, and that it would be wrong to turn our backs on them when they need rights just as badly as the African-Americans needed rights during the 1960s. Next he affirmed that its not like the homosexuals are asking for any special privileges or anything, for all they want is to be free from discrimination, and ordinary, universal entitlement of citizenship. Within that citizenship, should be the right to marry whoever they choose. Next he says that Homophobia weakens that nation. From the 90s to 2003, the United States military spent over $200 million recruiting and training troops to replace 10,000 troops who were discharged from the military for being openly gay (Bond 4). Not only that, but there are also more than a million children being raise by gay and lesbian parents. However the children are disadvantaged by the inability of the parents to receive the privileges and the protections that marriage provides. So, homophobia is putting children of same sex couples in jeopardy along with the military. Another thing that Bond mentions is that President Bush stated: Marriage is the most fundamental institution in our civilization. He then asks: Isnt that precisely why we should support, not oppose gay marriage? (Bond 3) Furthermore, Kurtz says that the prohibition on same sex marriage is the violation of a basic human right. He then goes on to say: Secular Humanists today would recognize marriages between two individuals, no matter what their gender. Mature adults should be permitted to work out their own living arrangements, and if they choose to join together, should enjoy the same rights-economic, political and social- as persons in religiously sanctified marriages (Kurtz 3). Kurtz also says that homosexuality can be proven to be genetic, and that since it can be proven, The Constitution should not discriminate against same sex preferences.

Talha Khan 5

Next, Confessore said that Bill Clinton stated that for more than a century, the Statue of Liberty has welcomed people from all over who wanted freedom, so now is the time to include marriage equality into the welcome (Confessore 1). Moving on, according to Capello, same sex marriage should be legalized because Homosexuals are human beings just like everyone else, not just some sex-crazed perverts that a lot of people paint them out to believe (Capello 27). Also Howard Moody says If marriage is the most fundamental institution of civilization and a major contributor to the social order in our society, why would anyone want to shut out homosexuals from the glorious attributes of this sacred institution? According to Capello, Same sex marriage should be allowed for the sake of the children that are adopted by these couples, for if these couples were to receive the same marriage rights as heterosexual couples, the children would receive privileges such as inheritance rights, child support and Social Security survivor benefits. He also says that amending the Constitution to permanently enshrine bigotry and discrimination is likewise immoral. Going back to the children, Capello states that legalizing same sex marriage will strengthen the institution of marriage by inviting more people to engage in unions of trust and commitment by extending important rights to children. In comparison, Andrew Koppelman cites a statement by Jonathan Rauch that says: Marriage is societys most fundamental institution. To bar any class of people from marring as they choose is an extraordinary act of deprivation. Koppelman also cites a line from author Andrew Sullivan, who describes marriage as the social institution that defines for many people the most meaningful part of their lives (Koppelman 33) Once again, same sex marriage should be legalized for the sake of the children. According to Wildman, a boy named Kasey Nicholson-McFadden stated: It doesnt bother me to tell kids my parents are gay. It does bother me to say they arent married. It makes me feel that

Talha Khan 6

our family is less than their family (Wildman 1). Another child, Chiah Connolly-Ingram, said: As the daughter of lesbian moms, I know that children are affected by this decision (Wildman 3). A college freshman, Zack Wahls added: At the end of the day, its really about separate but equal. This isnt just about lesbian and gay; its about tolerance and acceptance (Wildman 3). In comparison, Evan Wolfson, the executive director of Freedom to Marry, mentioned that there is no point to denying gay parents their rights, for all it does is hurt the kids (Wildman 3). In addition, according to Martha Jane Kaufman and Katie Miles: From our point of view, marriage is an institution that contributes to the privatization of social services like health-care and immigration rights that actually would be guaranteed basic rights for all human beings (Wildman 5). Additionally, Bond also mentions a survey of Pastors in Facts and Trends magazine, in which pastors were asked to name the biggest threat to family and marriage. The results were: 43% stated divorce, 38% stated negative influences in media, 36% said materialism, 24% cited absentee fathers, 48% said families without a stay at home parent, 17% said pornography, 14% said morality no being taught in schools was the biggest threat, and finally, 13% stated that poverty, unemployment and a poor economy was the biggest threat. However, not one of the pastors cited same sex marriage to be the biggest threat to families (Bond 3). These are all reasons why same sex marriage should be legal. It would uphold the values of the Constitution, by granting homosexual individuals the freedoms of heterosexual individuals. It would also uphold the moral values of society by treating homosexuals as human beings, and it would also help support the children of these couples.