The Conflict of Gay Marriage in America PHI 103: Informal Logic The Conflict of Gay Marriage in America Part One – Thesis Because America is a country founded on equal rights for all, marriage is a right that must be afforded to homosexuals. Arguments against gay marriage are often supported by religious ideals. In America, where we have freedom of religion or freedom to even choose not to be religious, these arguments should not be considered when forming laws. To do so would not be just. Part Two – Argument “Not allowing gays to marry is discrimination because they do not receive the same legal benefits that married people do.
Lauren Adams Melissa Helton English 102 2 February 2012 Summary of A. Sullivan’s “For Gay Marriage” & W. Bennett’s “Against Gay Marriage”. Andrew Sullivan and William J. Bennett have very different opinions about legalizing gay marriage. Sullivan suggests it should be legal, but Bennett argues that it would ruin everything marriage stands for in America. In his book Virtually Normal: An Argument about Homosexuality (1995), former New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan argues that not having gay marriage is a violation of equality. He points out that he is not referring to religious traditions but suggests, in a public institution, marriage should be available to any two citizens.
It is for this reason that states do not have to recognize out of state gay marriages unlike other legal measures protected by the Full Faith and Credit Clause. A history of muddied political interpretation has led to measures which overreach principles of federal law, and other similar discriminatory measures like USC section 7’s “definition of marriage and spouse.” The Full Faith and Credit Clause should be upheld in support of gay marriage because constitutionally, not doing so would misconstrue numerous constitutional norms. The Full Faith and Credit Clause normally protect things such as freedom of mobility, the commerce clause, the right to marry, and the right to travel. By not applying the Full Faith and Credit Clause, these liberties are combined and disregarded for a minority group. If a gay marriage (a legal status not a national law) is not guarded by Full Faith and Credit, implications on national economy, family law, and children’s rights are at risk.
Marriage is also not a religious right in the United States; it is a civil right as stated in the Constitution under the Federal Marriage Amendment (Longley 1). Although the Federal Marriage Amendment defines marriage between a man and woman, there has and continues to be same-sex marriage and nine states plus the District of Columbia are proof of that (“Gay marriage facts,” and
Another similarity was that they both had to deal with marriages. Both were issues that people now in days still don’t agree on which same sex marriages and interracial marriages. The difference in these two court cases was that in the Goodrigde v. Department of Public Health was that the Fourteenth Amendment was not on their side. That is where the ruling came out that the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim. It was said that the marriage didn’t guarantee “the fundamental right to marry a person of the same sex.” Also it was said that the marriage exclusion does not offend the liberty, freedom, equality, or due process provisions of the Massachusetts Constitution.
Is Same-Sex Marriage Right? The topic I have chosen to do my discursive essay is if Same-Sex marriage is right or wrong. I will be going over the two different opinions on it if people believe it should be legalised or if it should be banned. I will also be giving my opinion at the end, along with the conclusion. Many people feel that marriage is an institution between one man and one woman.
are many different parties one can choose to be part of but the two major parties that are focused on are the Democratic and Republican parties. There are also many issues that each party agrees and disagrees about. Possibly one of the most controversial issues that are debated about by each party is Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender rights. These rights pertain to marriage, adoption, the military, the employment non-discrimination act and the Matthew Shepard/ hate crimes act. Each party has a different opinion about each right and what should be done about those rights.
Since procreation can only occur between a man and a woman then same-sex marriage would not be able to achieve this purpose. There is a huge disconnection between homosexuality, and procreation and therefore, marriage. Lastly, homosexual relationships are abnormal and unnatural. Even though in today’s society, gay couples might be tolerated socially that does not mean gay marriage should be validated by the government. Using the same argument same-sex couples should not receive federal benefits.
Marriage is said to be an important contract, necessary to our societal structure. However, the debate over who can enter into this contract is argued by former editor Andrew Sullivan and cultural conservative, William Bennett. Both writers’ articles discuss points of view on the definition of marriage, who can enter into a marriage and possible societal impact. Andrew Sullivan’s article, “For Gay Marriage”, he defines marriage as “..the highest social public recognition of a private commitment..between two people..”. As well as “..recognition of personal integrity”.
Thomas mentions that gay and lesbian marriages should be the choice of the individuals not the government. He promotes gay and lesbian marriages by saying those who vote against gay and lesbian marriage are people of injustice. He states that we cannot solely base our decision on history alone, if so most states would still prohibit the marriage of different races. Thomas states that marriage should promote family and stability and people should not be denied this right. By depriving millions of gay American adults the rights that come from marriage, denies equal protection against the law.