Term paper on Gay Rights To Marriage

Free Gay Rights To Marriage papers

Good Stuff
The universe begins with a cataclysm that generates space and time, as well as all the matter and energy the universe will ever hold. For an incomprehensibly small fraction of a second, the universe is an infinitely dense, hot fireball. The prevailing theory describes a peculiar form of energy that

Good Teacher Essay
Good Teacher Essay For over twelve years I’ve been presented a diverse and random selection of teachers; some of which taught well and some didn’t. How can you distinguish between a good teacher and a bad teacher? The good teacher is the one that teaches the greatest and is the most vivid memory of

Crystal Bloom

Miss Hahn

English 1113

November 22, 2000

Gays Should Have the Right

My aunt, who lives in Missouri, has had a loving partner for about four years. They are both lesbians and want to get married someday when the law allows. I asked them to send me a letter on some of their thoughts on same-sex marriage. Out of her four-page letter I pulled this reply out, "If two people of the same sex choose to make a life together I feel that they should have the same rights as a man and women would have once they are married, but the real kicker is.... That a man and women can live together X number of years and can be considered by common law as a legal husband and wife. So for two couples of the same sex we should have the same rights as a man and woman does. For example health insurance, if one has insurance thru his or her employment it would be of great benefit to put your mate on your policy." So, why can't my "aunts" get married? It is illegal, as of now, to have same-sex marriages. Should these people have the same rights as heterosexual couples? I think so, because homosexual couples are real people, in real relationships, committed to each other the same way in which a heterosexual couple is committed to each other. I believe these people should have the same rights as everyone else.

Justice Anthony Kennedy writes for the majority of the Supreme Court in the decision in overturning Colorado's Amendment 2 referendum. "We cannot accept the view that Amendment 2's prohibition on specific legal protection does no more than deprive homosexuals of special rights. On the other hand, the amendment imposes a special disability on those persons alone. Homosexuals are forbidden the safeguards that other enjoy or may seek without constraint" (NetFirst). "A state cannot deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws," declared the Supreme Court, in 1996 (Qt in Eskridge). Gay men and women are citizens, entitled, like everyone else, to equal protection. Not any special rights, but the ones created in The Declaration of Independence. The unalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness are guaranteed to the citizens of the United States.

It is not common knowledge that nearly three out of four people support gays rights (NetFirst)? But at the same time the same percentage of people oppose gay marriage (NetFirst). How can people be that insincere? One of the reasons is the definition of marriage has changed throughout the years. It once was held that marriage was between a man and women. Then for centuries, marriages were a contract in which the wife was her husband's property, and we have changed that over time to fit our needs and wants. Later, the definition changed to marriage between two people of the same race, and once again we changed it to fit our own definition.

Definitions of marriage vary from state to state. In Minnesota, the Supreme Court held that the right to marry was inapplicable to same-sex unions because marriage, by definition, requires a man and woman, not two men (Eskridge). But on March 17, 1997, Maryland gay right activists won a battle against legislation, which tried to ban the recognition of same-sex marriages. Evan Wolfson, a gay rights activist states, "Time and time again people say we can't win these fights. But sometimes we do"(Advocate). Gay right activists won another small battle in the state of New Jersey. The small victory was that the court recognized the marriage of a post-operative male-to-female transsexual and a biological male (Eskridge).

Another reason people fight against gay marriages is the subject of raising children. If two people of the same sex can not raise children, then why are murderers, convicted felons of all sort, even known child molesters allowed to get married and bring children into their heterosexual marriages? Wanting a family is not a bad thing and the conservatives in this nation should realize that they are contradicting their belief system by opposing same-sex marriages. The fact is many gay couples do raise children. They either adopt the children and/or occasionally have their own biological children from failed attempts at heterosexual marriages. Many studies have shown that the outcomes of the children raised in homosexual homes are just as good as those children coming out of heterosexual homes. Psychologists tell us that the difference is the love received by the parents, not their gender (NetFirst). Studies are very clear about the love received by the children, and gay people have the same amount of love to give to children, as anyone else does (NetFirst).

Gay relationships are immoral. Why? Who said so? The Bible? I don't think so. Does not the Bible tell people to follow the Golden Rule, which is to do unto others, as you would have others do unto you? The Bible has no standing in American law, and gives no one the right to impose rule on anyone else because they perceive it be mandated by the Bible. Buddhism celebrates gays relationships freely, and would like to have the authority to make them legal marriages (NetFirst). Western United Methodist churches have been leading the fight for greater inclusion of...

Amiel, Barbara. "Same-Sex Marriage is Ok." Maclean's. 113.28. 1 Nov. 2000 *http://ehostgw11…anTerm=same20%2dsex%20marriages&fuzzyTerm=*.

Bidstrup, Scott. Gay Marriage: The Arguments and the Motives. 1 Nov 2000.*http://firstsearch.oclc.org/WebZ/FSFETCH?…titytoprecno=4:entitycurre.

4=:numrecs=1*1992-2000.

Bullough, Vern. "Why Same-Sex Marriages." Free Inquiry. 18, no.1 (Winter 1997):49. CD-ROM. Infromation Access. Nov 2000.

"Death of a Gay Marriage Ban." Advocate. 732. 1 Nov 2000. *http://ehostgw11…anTerm=same%2dsex%20marriages&fuzzyTerm=*.

Eskridge, William. Gaylaw: Challenging the Apartheid of the Closet. Cambridge:

Harvard Univeristy Press, 1999.

Feldmeier, John P. "Federalism and Full Faith and Credit: Most States Recognize Out -Of-State Same-Sex Marriages." Publius. 25, no.4 (Fall 1995): 107. Ed. Daniel Elazar and John Kincaid. CD-ROM. Information Access. Nov 2000.

"Methodists Protest Church Policy on Gays." Christian Century. 117.22. 1 Nov 2000. *http:// ehostgw11…m=same20%2dsex%20marriages&fuzzyTerm=*.

Mohr, Richard. A More Perfect Union: Why Straight America Must Stand Up For Gay Rights. Boston: Beacon Press, 1994.

Richards, David. Women, Gays, and the Constitution: The Grounds for Feminist and Gay Right in Culture and Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.

Ruskay-Kidd, Scott. "The Defense of Marriage Act and the Overextension of Congressional Authority." Columbia Law Review. 97, no 5 (June 01, 1997): 1435. CD-ROM. Information Access. Nov 2000.

Bibliography

attached