Homosexuals Should Have the Right to Matrimony

Homosexuals should have the right to matrimony

Only in the states of Vermont and California are gay couples allowed to marry. Same-sex marriage is very important with gay couples and activists in today's society. On January 1, 2002, a bill became effective to give members of registered same-sex and opposite-sex couples the right to adopt a partner's child. A reason why the Vermont same-sex union battle received so much nation press is because legislators were responding to a court order, while some ended up losing their jobs to same-sex unions. Religious, government, and social groups have debated this issue and it is taking a long time for it to be resolved. Same-sex marriage has some very distinct facts and values important to one's religion, morals, or even what his or her family thinks of the gay lifestyle. Although gay marriage has its opposition, there are those that regard it as something that should be permitted in American society. As a result, this causes a great deal of controversy when both sides of the argument are taken into perspective.

Many American's disagree with the legalization and recognition of same-sex marriages. According to USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll of 1,006 adults conducted on March 15-17, 1996, nearly 70 percent of U.S. adults oppose gay marriages, (National Campaign). A major argument that American's use to oppose gay marriage is that it offends everything religion stands for. Many typical religions believe that the gay lifestyle is completely immoral. Mormons are one of the main religions that oppose gay marriage. However, when the Mormon Church arrogantly claimed to represent all religion in the Baehr vs. Lewin trial in Hawaii, the principal Buddhist sect in that state made it very clear that the Mormon Church didn't represent them, and made it very clear that they support the right of gay couples to marry. That particular Buddhist sect claims many more members in Hawaii than does the Mormon Church, (Bidstrup, Oct 13, 2000).

Making love to another member of the same sex betrays everything that is masculine according to the perspective of those against gay marriages. However, not every gay man is a limp-wristed fairy. "There was a long-honored tradition of gay relationships among the tough and macho cowboys of the Old West, and many diaries exist in detailing their relationships" (Bidstrup, Oct 13, 2000). By this fact, it proves that not all gay men are feminine and some are actually very masculine.

Americans opposing same-sex marriage fear that gay people might recruit straight people to the gay lifestyle. They might suggest the thought of 'crossing-over' or experimenting with a member of the same sex and gradually change the mind and sexuality of another straight person. This is not a fact and more a common belief, like "blondes are all thick" Gay people know from experience that they can't change someone's sexuality because sexual orientation is inborn. Therefore they don't recruit straight people to become gay, because they know that their sexual orientation is inborn, and can not be changed. Indeed, the attempts by psychologists, counselors, religious therapy and support groups to change sexual orientation have all uniformly met with failure. In-fact, the studies that have been done of these therapies have never shown any significant results, (Bidstrup, Oct 13, 2000).

Looking at this matter from a different perspective, it is also interesting to note that some Americans are actually in favor of equal rights for homosexuals. "They say that yes, gays should have the same rights in housing, jobs, public accommodations, and should have equal access to government benefits, equal protection of the law, etc" (Bidstrup, Oct 13, 2000). Focusing more on this issue can help accelerate the outcome of recognizing same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriages ought to be legalized and recognized because the American government guarantees equal rights for all citizens.

The government says that every citizen of the United States shall receive equal rights. But, why did they pass the Defense of Marriage Act? This Act prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. This act is immoral and unjust because it restricts the rights of gay and lesbian citizens. "On September 10, 1996, the U.S. Senate passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages and allows individual states to refrain from recognizing them. President Clinton signed the bill into law on September 21, 1996" (Kowalewski 1998). This act should not have been passed because there is no important reason as to why it should have been passed in the first place. It has also caused many different confrontations with the people who are for and against same-sex marriage laws.

The Defense of Marriage Act emerged as a reply to the current court battles in the state of Hawaii. Three same-sex couples filed a lawsuit against the state of Hawaii claiming that current marriage laws preventing same-sex couples from marrying violated the couples' right to privacy and equal protection (Kowalewski 1998). Although the case was dismissed, it was held because the law disobeys equal protection. "Even though the case was dismissed in trial court, the Hawaii State Supreme Court held that the case had advantage and should be heard because the current law does disobey equal protection under the state's constitution" (Kowalewski 1998). The judge of the Hawaii State Supreme Court ruled that the state must issue licenses to the three couples on the grounds of no convincing evidence. "On December 3, 1996, the judge ruled that the state of Hawaii must issue marriage licenses to the three couples because the state had provided no convincing reasons to reject them. This case is now on appeal, (Kowalewski 1998). While this was going on, Hawaii passed a law, establishing beneficiaries a state certificate, qualifying them for many legal rights and benefits usually given to married persons, such as, insurance benefits through another's employer. "In the meantime, Hawaii has passed a law that establishes "reciprocal