регистрация / вход

Same Sex Marriage Essay Research Paper How

Same Sex Marriage Essay, Research Paper How do most couples show the world that they are in a loving, devoted, committed relationship? How does one express that they want to spend the rest of their life with one particular person? This is normally done through a marriage, celebrated by a wedding, certified by a marriage license.

Same Sex Marriage Essay, Research Paper

How do most couples show the world that they are in a loving, devoted, committed relationship? How does one express that they want to spend the rest of their life with one particular person? This is normally done through a marriage, celebrated by a wedding, certified by a marriage license. Homosexuals are human; therefore they are capable of loving another person just as any heterosexual human. Yet, homosexuals are unable to obtain a marriage license anywhere in this country at this time. This needs to be changed; same-sex marriages should be legal in the United States of America.

According to the Constitution, marriage is a civil right that all Americans are born with. Our country has decided by passing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996 that two people of the same gender cannot get married (Alm et al. 201). By taking away this basic civil right, America has defied what our Founding Fathers based our country one, freedom. Homosexuals are allowed to speak freely, to bear arms, to have privacy, to be protected; what about to marry? It is wrong to base a person?s civil rights on sexuality.

Along with the basic civil right to marry, there are other rights that the Defense of Marriage Act denies homosexuals. Rights that married people take for granted, such as the ability to visit a sick or injured spouse in the hospital, are denied to gay and lesbian people. Because of the law, hospitals and other institutions do not have to respect the basic human rights of gay and lesbian couples. Likewise, if one partner in a married couple is seriously ill and incapacitated, the other spouse should be able to make decisions regarding their care and guardianship. This basic right of guardianship is denied to gay and lesbian couples, because, again, their committed relationships are not recognized under the law. If one partner is incapacitated, the other partner is not given the right to make basic health care decisions. If homosexual couples had legal partnerships, there would not be any cases of confusion over guardianship or visitation in places like hospitals.

There is also a financial perk to legalizing same-sex marriages in this country. It is predicted that there would be a large income tax revenue, and that should make most tax-paying citizens happy. In most same-sex couples, both people hold jobs so they are both earners. A married couple with two earners normally has a high income tax, meaning more money for the government. Therefore, if same-sex marriages are allowed, the tax revenue will increase due to more marriages consisting of two earners (Alm et al. 202).

Many people argue that homosexuality is dirty, unclean, or disgusting. They say that most gay people have sexually transmitted diseases. The only reason that society still has this view of homosexuality is that they do not see the relationship side of it. With same-gender marriages being illegal, the only kind of sex that can go on in gay relationships is out of wedlock. This is what promotes the viewpoint of promiscuity in the gay community. When homosexual marriages are made legal and become popular, society?s view of gay people will become more positive.

The nation as a whole is looking at gay marriage as a moral issue; everyone must hold the same beliefs and values. In this country, there are a so many different religions and ethnicities, making it impossible for all citizens to have the same beliefs. This issue of same-gender marriages should be looked at much the same way as the issue of abortion was looked at. Hank Nichols explained this quite well by saying, ?the Supreme Court did not require that we all approve of abortions, only that we accept the right to abortion? (Nichols 2). No minister should be required to marry any same-sex couple, but these marriages should be recognized in all states.

Marriage has always been seen as a personal decision in this country, but obviously it is not. The government has the power to say that two people of the same gender cannot get married; are two, law-abiding, tax-paying adults not responsible enough to decide for themselves who to spend the rest of their lives with? What ever happened to tolerance, ?live and let live? (Nichols 2)? The government controls so many aspects of our lives, it is time to stand up for this country and say that they cannot control who we marry.

Alm, James; Badgett, Lee; Whittington, Leslie. ?Wedding Bell Blues: The Income Tax Consequences or Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage.? National Tax Journal. Jun 2000: 201. Online Academic Search Elite. 14 Nov 2000.

Amiel, Barbara. ?Same-Sex Marriage Is OK.? Maclean?s. 10 July 2000: 13. Online. Academic Search Elite. 17 Oct. 2000.

?Baby Steps for the Cheneys.? Advocate. 24 Oct. 2000: 14. Online. Academic Search Elite. 14 Nov. 2000.

Brunelle, Jim. Letter. Portland Press Herald 15 Sept. 2000. Blethen Maine Newspapers, Inc. Online. Academic Search Elite. 17 Oct. 2000.

Dowling, Claudia Glenn. ?Culture Clash.? People 23 Oct. 2000: 56-69.

Gallagher, John. ?Dark of Knight.? Advocate. 11 Apr. 2000: 20-1. Online. Academic Search Elite. 17 Oct. 2000.

Kurtz, Stanley. ?What Is Wrong with Gay Marriage.? Commentary Sept. 2000: 35-41.

Miller, D.W. ?Legal Scholars of Gay Rights Offer Strategies to Combat the ?Apartheid of the Closet?.? Chronicle of Higher Education. 21 July 2000: 15-17. Online. Academic Search Elite. 14 Nov. 2000.

Nichols, Hank. ?It?s Not About sex, It?s About Commitment.? The Boston Globe 9 Jul. 2000, third ed. Globe Newspaper Company. Online. Lexis-Nexis. 17 Oct. 2000.

?Proceeding With Gay Unions.? Christian Century. 16 Aug. 2000. Online. Masterfile Premier. 14 Nov. 2000.

?States may copy Vermont?s civil unions.? Unknown. Christianity Century. 16 Aug. 2000: 826-7.

Stiers, Gretchen. From This Day Forward. New York: St. Martin?s Press, 1999.

?UMC policy toward gays defied.? Unknown. Christian Century. 21 Jun. 2000: 673-4.

Van Biema, David; Cole, Wendy; McLaughlin, Lisa. ?Out of the Fold?? Time. 3 July 2000. Online. Academic Search Elite. 14 Nov 2000.

?10 Reasons to Oppose Gay ?Marriage?.? Unknown. The Reagan Information Interchange 5 Dec. 1996 .

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

Комментариев на модерации: 1.

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий