I was about 7 years old when I was exposed to same sex couples. I had two really close friends in elementary school who has same sex parents, one of my friend’s name was Devin she had two dads and my other friend’s name was Tessa, she had two moms. When I would come over for playdates I always wondered why Devin didn’t have a mom and why Tessa didn’t have a dad, and thats when they told me their parents were homosexuals. At the age of 7 I didn’t understand what that meant until one day at school when Tessa was getting bullied because she had two moms and one of her moms came to father daughter day. I began hearing the words “gay” and “fags” I didn’t understand what was so bad about the situation. Tessa simply didn’t have a father so her mother stepped in so she wouldn’t feel lonely. I asked my teacher, “what was so different about Tessa’s life?” and she explained to me that there are some people that prefer to take interest and love people of the same sex and her moms happen to be one those people. Although they aren’t the traditional heterosexual couple, they aren’t any less human than heterosexual couples. As the year went on and I was exposed to more same sex couples I realized that the only differences between hertrosexual couples and homosexual couples is that many hertrosexual couples I knew were married, and none of the homosexual couples I knew were.
I have compared and contrast two articles that I have read, one from La Shawn Barber, “Interracial Marriage: Slippery Slope?” and “The Loving Decision” by the Anna Quindlen, both openly opinionating their views on same sex marriage. In “Interracial Marriage: Slippery Slope?” the author La Shawn Barber, starts the article with a bit of a history lesson. Barber mentions a cas...
... middle of paper ...
...uindlen quotes a statement by s David Buckel, the Marriage Project director for Lambda Legal, “I think the day will come when the lesbian and gay community will have its own Loving v. Virginia” and talks about how Mildred Loving herself supports same sex marriage, by quoting “no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry."
As of today 14 out of 50 states allow same sex marriage, all other 36 states have banned same sex marriage or doesn’t have any laws against it or for it. For years same sex couples have fought for their right to be able to get marry, and for years they have been shut down due to many reasons: religion, traditions, it’s abnormal, it’s not natural, it defeats the concept of marriage, children needs both a male and female role model in their life to be successful and many more.
In the Loving v. Virginia, 388 US 1 (1967) is the landmark ruling that nullified anti-miscegenation laws in the United States. In June 1958, Mildred Loving, a black female, married Richard Loving, a white male, in Washington, DC. The couple traveled to Central Point, Virginia and their home was raided by the local police. The police charged the Loving’s of interracial marriage, a felony charge under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code which prohibited interracial marriages. On January 6, 1959, the couple pled guilty and received a suspended sentence with the agreement that they would Virginia and not return for 25 years. In November 6, 1963, the couple filed a motion in the state court to vacate the original judgment on the grounds it violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
Abstract On June 26, 2015 a divided Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples could now marry nationwide. At the time of the split ruling there were 9 supreme court justices, 5 of the justices were Republicans, and the remaining 4 were Democrats. In high profile cases it is except that the justices will vote along party lines. When the 5-4 ruling was reveled by the following statement. “It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right (Corn,2015).” written by
Wolf, Richard. “Timeline: Same-Sex marriage through the years.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 26 June 2015,
Facts: Two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter a colored woman and Richard Loving a white man, got married in the District of Columbia. The Loving's returned to Virginia and established their marriage. The Caroline court issued an indictment charging the Loving's with violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages. The state decides, who can and cannot get married. The Loving's were convicted of violating 20-55 of Virginia's code.
...icant. This one for many families today is very important. These cases are also the reason why during a census you have the opportunity to check multiple races, instead of just one. This case stirred debates of gay marriage, which is a matter of personal opinion. It is up to you whether that is a pro or a con.
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...
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.
Beginning with the topic on gay marriage and the controversial battle between authors, Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett, Sullivan is the gay supporter. In Sullivan’s piece, “Let Gays Marry,” he opens with a statement by the Supreme Court, “A state cannot deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws.” He feels that this simple sentence has so much meaning, saying that whatever type of person, male or female, black or white, everyone deserves the same legal protection and equal rights. Therefore, gay marriage should not be excluded from the legal system. He tells that some churches practice different beliefs and may oppose gay marriage but religion has nothing to do with the state appeals. Sullivan explains how the definition of marriage has changed in the past and that it can be done again. Sullivan ends his piece by saying that changing the law would not affect straight couples, so why are they against gay marriage? He believes the change would allow gay couples to experience what straight couples already have.
Lately it seems like everyone is "coming out" as lgbtq because it seems like the coolest thing to do. Kids at school don't understand that just a few years ago, coming out was horrible. In the past few years, so much has changed for the LGBTQ Community. Marriage is being legalized all over the place, and people are learning to speak out about their rights. Six years ago, my parents found out I was bisexual after they went through my computer. My mom screamed, cried, threw things, and questioned me relentlessly. She couldn't possibly understand what it was that I was going through. At school, I was bullied and pushed around because I was that "weird little lesbian". In a small school of just a little under 200, once one person knew something about you, everyone knew your secret. The world dropped out from underneath my feet.
“What’s the big whoop?” asks a cute, blonde, elementary school aged boy when his teacher discusses homosexuality. He didn’t understand why people cared who other people loved. Little kids are perfect examples of how society’s negativity towards homosexuality creates homophobia. Children don’t understand why it matters who you love because they don’t see it as a problem and their opinions aren’t clouded by stereotypes. If LGBT issues were taught to these innocent, uninvolved children in elementary school, it would be more likely they would be accepting as they grew up. It is important to present LGBT in a positive light before parents, classmates, and media influence their perceptions.
Eckholm, E. (2014, February 4). Arguments Heard in Federal Challenge of Virginia’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban. The New
But during this period of adolescence, I never really thought about what I was. All the things that took place in the emotional-sexual realm were, admittedly, real and concrete to me: I experienced real feelings for other boys (love, infatuation, sexual attraction). But at the same time, on an "intellectual" level, I never confronted these feelings, and so I continued having them without worrying about them or trying to transform them in any way. They just were, and that was fine with me. While some opponents of homosexuality often claim that it is "unnatural" (a claim which is thoroughly refuted in the essay "Homosexuality and the 'Unnaturalness Argument'"), for me, my homosexual feelings were very natural indeed.
In today's society, there exists a mixture of issues which tend to raise arguments with people all over. There are a handful of topics that always seem to escalate these differences between people to the point where one who earnestly participates in discussion, debate and argument can direct their anger towards their feelings on the person themselves. Some examples of such delicate subjects are the death penalty, abortion, and euthanasia. An issue that has in recent years, begun to increase arguments, is the acceptability of homosexuality in society. Until recently, homosexuality was considered strictly taboo. If an individual was homosexual, it was considered a secret to be kept from all family, friends, and society. However, it seem that society has begun to accept this lifestyle by allowing same sex couples. The idea of coming out of the 'closet' has moved to the head of homosexual individuals when it used to be the exception. Homosexuality is nothing to be ashamed of and we should all come to realize this.
Gay and lesbian unions have been for a long time a subject that no one liked to discuss. For the last few decades, gays and lesbians have come out and expressed their sexuality preferences. Many believe that same sex marriage should not be legalized because it's against the moral. It's against the definition of marriage, which is considered as the union of a man and a woman as a husband and wife. Same sex marriage should be legalized because the way society views the union of lesbian and gays can a change. Another reason why same sex marriage should be legalized is that children that are issued from a gay or lesbian couple will be loved and raised in a family that is legally recognized under the law. Lesbians and gays also deserve to have the same rights as heterosexuals.
There are many opponents of gay people as it is, and they all have their reasons to dislike the idea of permitting them get married. One of the main reasons is that the primary purpose of marriage is procreation. Because gay couples are unable to have children, they should not be allowed to marry (Schiffen 495). Another main argument is that the word marriage means the union of one man and one woman. This is a long-standing theme of most major Western religions. Under a proposed bill known as the Defense of Marriage act, marriage is defined as “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” Furthermore, it defines a spouse as “ a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or wife” (What 1). Under these guidelines, it is quite obvious that gay couples would not be eligible for marriage. People against homosexual marriage also say that it is a person’s choice to be gay. Since the individual chooses to be a homosexual, they should not be given special privileges. Another argument that you hear is that these couples should not get married simply because of the torment and ridicule they would be faced with in their everyday lives. There are news reports from across America telling about how a gay person was beaten or killed just because they were looked at as different. Some of these people would end up the target of verbal abuse and maybe even physical abuse, just because some heterosexual people see them as different.