Marriage, A Right or Privilege?
Thesis Statement: I believe that same sex marriages should be given the same privileges and benefits as other married couples, in order to have equality and eliminate injustice within society. There has been a major debate for years on if individuals of the same sex are allowed to be married. The same sex marriage topic has caused a major trend in society, which has raised many arguments related to the issue. This research paper argues that same sex marriage should be allowed because homosexual couples are also citizens with equal rights as everyone else. Some individuals don’t think it is fair for any individual to be denied marriage and no one has the right to deny true love, and marriage should be about
…show more content…
The Court researched and noticed the upholding with Alabama's interest in criminalizing interracial relationships without deploying the proper language used by the state supreme court that explained the need to avoid the creation of a mongrel population, and later that year the Court enforced the Civil Rights Act of 1875.2. In 1964 the next great civil rights act was passed with McLaughlin v. Florida, which enforced a statute that criminalized interracial marriages, but not same-sex marriages. The case Romer vs Evans involved a Colorado plebiscite that amended the state's constitution so as to overturn laws protecting same sex individuals from discrimination, and barred any prospective legislation anywhere in the state resembling the laws it had just overturned, which made it illegal under the Colorado Constitution to pass laws to protect the civil rights of same sex couples. (N. Goetting). John F. Kennedy saw this amendment as an unconstitutional attack against same-sex individuals, identifying one trait that they possess and relegating them to second class legal status for possessing that trait. Same sex marriage should be legalized because marriage itself is a basic human right and all should be treated the …show more content…
(S.Monsma). Wright Allen quoted the speech Mildred Loving delivered on the 40th anniversary of the Loving vs Virginia ruling, and it had some good solid points, and it makes you understand how she felt when they gave the decision. One of the things said in Loving’s speech I felt was very interesting was when she stated “I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry, and government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others”.
In the 1996 Supreme Court case Romer v. Evans, the voters of the state of Colorado approved a second amendment to their state Constitution through a referendum, in order to prevent homosexuals from becoming a protected minority. Before the referendum occurred, many of the major cities in Colorado passed laws prohibiting people to be discriminated against based on their sexuality, including whether or not they are homosexual. The citizens of Colorado who disapprove of homosexuality then created a petition to put the second amendment to a vote, and won with a majority of 53% of the votes. Richard Evans, with the support of many others, took the amendment to court claiming it was unconstitutional, and should be removed from the constitution, going on to win in the Colorado Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court.
A unanimous Supreme Court decision overturned the Lovings convictions on June 12, 1967. The Supreme Court ruled that Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute violated the Fourteenth Amendment, specifically the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. Chief Justice Warren’s opinion stated that the Constitution provide citizens “the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”
It was not that long ago that interracial marriage was prohibited in the United States. In fact, in 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court decision established that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. Laws against interracial marriage were unfair and unconstitutional according to the 14th amendment, which granted citizens the right to equal protection of the law and due process. The famous case that granted the right to marry interracially was Loving vs. Virginia. In June 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, an African American woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia where it was legal. When returning back home the Lovings were charged with violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages. The couple...
The two texts examined within, present the opposing extremes of views regarding gay and lesbian marriage. The first text entitled Let Gays Marry by Andrew Sullivan examines the intricacies of same sex relationships and why homosexual couples should be allowed to publicly show affection for one another. The second text that will be examined is titled Leave Marriage Alone written by William Bennett. Bennett gives his views on why couples of same sex nature should not be allowed to engage in marital relations. These two authors, although very different, each has a view of the ideals of marriage, and how it should be presented to the public.
For some background, this case escalated to the Supreme Court since several groups of same-sex couples from different states, sued state agencies when their marriage was refused to be recognized. As it escalated through appeals, the plaintiffs argued that the states were violating the Equal Protection clause and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Equal Protection, according to the Constitution refers to the fact that, “any State [shall not] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” (23). The opposition of this case was that, 1) The Constitution does not address same-sex marriage as a policy, and 2) The sovereignty of states regarding the decision. Ultimately, and according to the Oyez project, the Court held that “[the Amendment] guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, and that analysis applies to same-sex couples,” and therefore, same-sex marriage is a fundamental liberty.
“Under our constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of the other race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the states.” In 1967, Earl Warren led the Supreme Court when it was faced with choosing to support a state’s rights of having their own laws or equal protection of the laws granted to all citizens under the Constitution. The case of Loving v. Virginia was sent to the Supreme Court because Virginia, including 15 other states, enforced an anti-miscegenation statute, which disallowed marriage between white and black people. The court case was important then and continues to affect change in the twenty-first century.
This validated the Lovings' argument that their 14th Amendment was being violated when they were arrested. As stated by Chief Justice Earl Warren, “Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.” In other words, states cannot create laws that infringe upon U.S. citizens rights that are stated in the Constitution. A state's interest in regulating marriage cannot justify the violation of someone's rights. Abolishing the right for states to create anti-miscegenation redrew the boundaries of state power.
In today’s society, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community has been more accepted then in years prior, especially in the 1960’s and years prior to that, when anyone in the LGBT community would be horribly ridiculed, if not tortured. However, there still lies a long road for the LGBT community, as it pertains to human rights, equality, and particularly, marriage equality. Each individual has their own perception on marriage equality, whether it is based on moral basis, or on a humanistic (humane) basis, which is the belief of not denying anyone the right to be who they are, and therefore love who they love. However, as a society, we must examine the facts, as well as ourselves, as we address the debate for marriage equality for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender community.
Virginia case. This case was about how an interracial couple wanted to get married and Virginia state said no. This was unfair also. The Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution (Constitution) prohibits classifications drawn by any statute that constitutes arbitrary and invidious discrimination. The fact that Virginia bans only interracial marriages involving whites is proof that the miscegenation statutes exist for no purposes independent of those based on arbitrary and invidious racial discrimination (case briefs). Virginia had a law that said black and white people could not marry. At the end of the case the Supreme Court decision was that to have a law that rules against interracial marriage was
As an American citizen, a person should be entitled to marry whoever they choose, regardless of gender or sexual preference. Gay marriage is something that some people consider to be taboo while other people are very supportive of it; I am one of the latter. The ability to marry someone is a basic human right and it should not be taken away from someone because they love a person of the same gender. One of the main reasons that gay marriage is illegal in the United States is because of what the Bible says about it, regardless of the fact that the first Amendment of the US Constitution says that there is to be a separation between church and state. Approximately three point eight percent of the United States population is made up of people
Within America’s society today, 3.8 percent of the population is gay, lesbian, or bisexual. With only 17 of the 50 states legalizing and recognizing this type of relationship (“History…”), it puts a stronghold on same-sex couples to publicly declare their love with the promise of marriage. Same-sex marriages should be legalized because everyone has equal rights of freedom and liberty.
The recognition of same-sex marriage is a political, social, and religious issue. Because of this same-sex marriage is a very controversial topic. Legal acknowledgement of same sex marriage is commonly referred to as marriage equality. Many advocates of marriage equality argue that laws restricting marriage to only heterosexuals discriminate against homosexuals. On the other hand advocates against same-sex marriage argue that it would undo long-standing traditions and change the meaning of marriage in a damaging manor. In this essay I will be arguing for same-sex marriage. The arguments mentioned as well as others will be discusses throughout this paper.
Over the last years the topic of same-sex marriage has been of great importance to our society. The idea of the same gender being lawfully married is disturbing to a group of people but in the recent years the number of supporters has increased. The cases that argue for the legalization of same-sex marriage are focusing on the relationship of the individuals and do not see anything in same-sex marriage that could harm our society as a whole. The article “How the President go to ‘I Do’ on Same-Sex Marriage,” published by Joe Becker in April 2014, explains how Barack Obama started saying that he was undecided about the subject matter but is now leaning toward the legalization of same-sex marriage. The subject matter takes a lot of analyzing of what pros and cons are to come from the legalization of same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage is a global argument that deals with unifying two individuals of the same gender under the law. The main reason that supporters give for justifying same-sex marriage is that it is for the same reason as straight people, to show love and commitment to each other. Furthermore, the argument of same-sex marriage is difficult to generalize because of the multiple factors that need to be taken in consideration when making any decision regarding this topic. Although Becker does have true premises, he lacks clarity in his terms which make his argument be false and invalid.
Why isn’t gay marriage legal yet? How does gay marriage affect people that aren’t gay? Why does it matter to those people? Why can’t gay people have the same rights as straight people? Gay marriage should be legal worldwide. Gay marriage or same-sex marriage is when a man and man or women and a woman get married. Same-sex marriage impacts society in different types of ways, some people are affected by it because they think it is against the bible, others seem to have no impact or problem with same-sex marriage. However for the gay community it affects them, because in some states they are not allowed to marry the one they are in love with it. Also it impacts them because there are groups of people against same-sex marriage and the gay community is constantly being judged by people opposed to same-sex marriage. Seventeen states have legalized same-sex marriage; Thirty-three states banned same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage provides a more stable environment for children of gay couples. Legalizing same-sex marriage does not affect or harm heterosexual marriages. Marriage is a union of love, not a union of genders.
In recent years, same-sex marriage has become a more controversial topic on whether it’s right or wrong. People should not feel coerced to agree with something they believe is wrong; clearly, same-sex marriage is immoral and unnatural. Many complications come with same-sex marriages including financial pressures, social pressures, moral pressures, and health risks.