Congress knows this is a hot button issue with many Americans and the arguments against it just can’t hold up. Nothing bad can come out of gay marriage. I saw a man protesting on the news holding a picket sign which read, “What would happen if gay marriage were legalized?!? !......Gay people would get married.” I thought his sign was perfect. Why are we so up in arms over this?
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.
His rebuttal made a valid point that lead you to question the sanctity of marriage. Pointing out arranged marriages, Keith Olberman, pushed the envelope even further by questioning the love and respect that we have for one another. As Olbermann’s argument came to a close, he “de-fined” marriage, by pulling the religion card right from under Proposition Eight’s nose. He continued to press the meaning of love and the meaning of why we are alive. He questioned the religious aspects of what is considered to be wrong, to mortality for what is
This brings up questions and arguments of why they oppose gay marriage. Religion plays a part in this argument; their definition of marriage is between a man and woman as stated in the bible, specifically the book of Genesis (“Should Gary Marriage” 2). In response to their accusation, while from a religious viewpoint marriage is defined between a man and women, marriage is ultimately a legal binding by law. People can be married in a church that may symbolize their marriage, but until they receive a legal documentation of their marriage license they are not considered married. 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).
Question: Should the full faith and credit clause uphold gay marriage nationwide? Answer: Yes “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.” These words contained in the Full Faith and Credit Clause has been used to unify our states, and provide legal safety nets for a plethora of important binding legalities. Most recently, The Full Faith and Credit Clause had been watered down by other constitutional measures like the 96 “Defense of Marriage Act” but in reality, denying gay marriage national protection under the clause is counter to its purpose and a historical anomaly. Many like current Justice Scalia argue that traditional choice, based on public policy is a standard of US politics and is constitutional. 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.
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.
There is near a 50% divorce rate among heterosexual marriages. Allowing homosexuals to marry would likely increase the number of non-serious marriages and the divorce rate will also more than likely increase. Secondly, almost every religion in the world considers homosexuality unacceptable, therefore a sin. Because it is recognized by every religion as a sin making same-sex marriage legal would be offensive and a disregard of the religious freedom we recognize in our country. We need to remember that marriage is a religious rite.
Many people feel that marriage is an institution between one man and one woman. Well, that's the most often heard argument, one even codified in a recently passed U.S. federal law. Yet it is easily the weakest. It seems to me that if the straight community cannot show a compelling reason to deny the institution of marriage to gay people, it shouldn't be denied. And such simple, nebulous declarations are hardly a compelling reason.
When does life start? 3. What is the societal implication of abortion? Most Catholics and Protestants would agree that abortion is unacceptable on the grounds that humans are made in God's image and therefore it is a grave sin to kill anything human (Christians therefore believe all humans are equal in value). They provide evidence for the idea that life starts at conception with biblical quotes like "the days ordained to me were written in your book before one even came to be" and "your eyes saw my unformed body" suggesting that our personhood in God's view starts at as soon as the egg is fertilised.
According to "Defense Of Marriage Act" (1996), “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.’’ (3). Another reason why we have an injustice is different religious beliefs. For example a military member who is Catholic is taught through the bible that homosexuality is wrong so marriage is between a man and a woman. Leviticus 20:13 (American standard verison) "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads”.