Pros and Cons of Same Sex Marriage

1 Reply

As I have now defined the issue of same sex marriage and the stakeholders of the controversial
issue, I think it is time that I move into the pros and cons of this civic issue. Frankly speaking, it is
very important to discuss these points as it gives both sides of the issue from those who are for and
against same sex marriage.

When debating or discussing this issue, an important question to ask is whether or not legalizing
same-sex marriage hurt the traditional marriage. The issue of should gay marriage be legally
recognized was addressed in a pro/con forum where two experts from either side argued a particular
side. He who argued for the pro side had this to day. Many people see marriage as the bringing
together of two people and an opportunity for friends and family to come together in recognizing the
couples commitment to each other. However, it is so much more than that because it is a unique
relationship of two people. The word marriage is identical to family because a family starts out with
two people and grows as big as it wants to. Furthermore, marriage gives the right of way to
hundreds of legal protections established by the state and thousands by the federal government
(Jost).

Gay and lesbian families are entitled to limited laws and can only protect themselves in limited ways.
In order to entitle themselves to such laws, they would have to go to extensive measures to see them
through. As marriage is a social institution of the highest importance, it is important that all married
couples regardless of homo- or heterosexual be granted these rights and liberties. Otherwise,
the gay community will continue to fall short of the status of full citizenship, marking them inferior to
the rest of society (Jost).

In response to the pro- same-sex marriage writer, the opposition had this to say: Genetically
speaking, marriage based on the fact that human beings have distinct differences, starting with either
XX- or XY-chromosomes. Sexual orientation can and does change sometimes. There are some
more distinctions between same-sex couples and married couples. They may are missing the
essential element: they may have children, but so does an orphanage; they may have long term
contracts, but so do parents, children, etc. According to the opposition, the key element is the
differentiation between the XX and the XY chromosomes, which are vital to representing the two
halves of the human body, thus being able to preserve the human race.

Upon reading this, I could not let this go unaddressed. How is this article even published when
someone says something like this? Seriously, what difference does it make what gender you are?
The first person makes a great point: why should it matter what gender you are? Regardless, you
should be able to love whomever you love. Society is only making the current situation worse by
creating more problems in relation to this topic by saying such things as this.
Back to the original point being made about whether or not legalizing gay marriage hurts traditional
marriage. If you ask me, the answer is absolutely no; there is no correlation between traditional
marriage and gay marriage. If anything, it only adds more flavor and more variety into the topic and
issue of marriage. I agree on the fact that it is definitely an issue, but that is only because people are
making it an issue. Instead, if everyone were to just accept gay marriage and move on with the rest
of their lives, I think the society would be better off; I mean lets be honest: there are other leading
countries around the world that accept gay marriage and they approve of it. So at the end of the day,
what it all boils down to is Why not? I feel like I am harping on the same topic on each blog post,
but it seriously is a big issue that needs to be addressed.

PRO Gay Marriage

Same-sex couples should be allowed to publicly celebrate their commitment
in the same way as heterosexual couples. [40] The Human Rights Campaign
Foundation states that many same-sex couples "want the right to legally
marry [and] honor their relationship in the greatest way our society has to
offer..."

Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by

heterosexual married couples. Many benefits are only available to married
couples, such as hospital visitation during an illness, taxation and inheritance
rights, access to family health coverage, and protection in the event of the
relationship ending. [6] An Oct. 2, 2009 analysis by the New York Times
estimates that a same-sex couple denied marriage benefits will incur an
additional $41,196 to $467,562 in expenses over their lifetime compared to a
married heterosexual couple. [7]

The concept of "traditional marriage" being defined as one man and one
woman is historically inaccurate. Given the prevalence of modern and
ancient examples of family arrangements based on polygamy, communal
child-rearing, the use of concubines and mistresses and the commonality of
prostitution, heterosexual monogamy can be considered "unnatural in
evolutionary terms. [3]

Marriage is redefined as society's attitudes evolve, and the majority of

Americans now support gay marriage. Interracial marriage was illegal in
many US states until a 1967 Supreme Court decision. Coverture, where a
woman's legal rights and economic identity were subsumed by her husband
upon marriage, was commonplace in 19th century America. No-fault divorce
has changed the institution of marriage since its introduction in California on
Jan. 1, 1970. With a May 2013 Gallup poll showing 53% of Americans
supporting gay marriage, it is time for the definition of marriage to evolve
once again. [72]

Gay marriage is protected by the Constitution's commitments to liberty and

equality. The US Supreme Court ruled in 1974s Cleveland Board of Education
v. LaFleur that the "freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and
family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause. US
District Judge Vaughn Walker wrote on Aug. 4, 2010 that Prop. 8 in California
banning gay marriage was "unconstitutional under both the Due Process and
Equal Protection Clauses." [41]

Denying same-sex couples the right to marry stigmatizes gay and lesbian
families as inferior and sends the message that it is acceptable to
discriminate against them. The Massachusetts Supreme Court wrote in an
opinion to the state Senate on Feb. 3, 2004 that offering civil unions was not
an acceptable alternative to gay marriage because "...it is a considered
choice of language that reflects a demonstrable assigning of same-sex,
largely homosexual, couples to second-class status." [42]

Gay marriages can bring financial gain to state and local governments.
Revenue from gay marriage comes from marriage licenses, higher income
taxes (the so-called "marriage penalty"), and decreases in costs for state
benefit programs. [4] The Comptroller for New York City found that legalizing
gay marriage would bring $142 million to the citys economy and $184
million to the states economy over three years. [43

Gay marriage would make it easier for same-sex couples to adopt, providing
stable homes for children who would otherwise be left in foster care. [68] In
the US, 100,000 children are waiting to be adopted. [44] A longitudinal study
published in Pediatrics on June 7, 2010 found that children of lesbian mothers
were rated higher than children of heterosexual parents in social and
academic competence and had fewer social problems. [45] A July 2010 study
found that children of gay fathers were "as well-adjusted as those adopted
by heterosexual parents." [46] As Washington Post columnist Ezra Klein
argues, "We should be begging gay couples to adopt children. We should see
this as a great boon that gay marriage could bring to kids who need nothing
more than two loving parents." [68]

Marriage provides both physical and psychological health benefits, and

banning gay marriage increases rates of psychological disorders. [5] The
American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and
others wrote in a Sep. 2007 amicus brief, "...allowing same-sex couples to
marry would give them access to the social support that already facilitates
and strengthens heterosexual marriages, with all of the psychological and
physical health benefits associated with that support. [47] A 2010 analysis
published in the American Journal of Public Health found that after their
states had banned gay marriage, gay, lesbian and bisexual people suffered a
37% increase in mood disorders, a 42% increase in alcohol-use disorders,
and a 248% increase in generalized anxiety disorders. [69]

Legalizing gay marriage will not harm heterosexual marriages or "family

values," and society will continue to function successfully. A study published
on Apr. 13, 2009 in Social Science Quarterly found that "[l]aws permitting
same-sex marriage or civil unions have no adverse effect on marriage,
divorce, and abortion rates, [or] the percent of children born out of
wedlock..." [48] The Executive Board of the American Anthropological
Association found that more than a century of research has shown "no
support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders
depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather,
anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family
types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to
stable and humane societies." [8]

Marriage is a secular institution which should not be limited by religious

objections to gay marriage. Nancy Cott, PhD, testified in Perry v.
Schwarzenegger that "[c]ivil law has always been supreme in defining and
regulating marriage and that religious leaders are accustomed to
performing marriages only because the state has given them that authority.
[41]

Gay marriage legalization is correlated with lower divorce rates, while gay
marriage bans are correlated with higher divorce rates. Massachusetts, which
became the first state to legalize gay marriage in 2004, had the lowest
divorce rate in the country in 2008. Its divorce rate declined 21% between
2003 and 2008. Alaska, which altered its constitution to prohibit gay
marriage in 1998, saw a 17.2% increase in its divorce rate. The seven states
with the highest divorce rates between 2003 and 2008 all had constitutional
prohibitions to gay marriage. [2]

If the reason for marriage is strictly reproduction, infertile couples would not
be allowed to marry. Ability or desire to create offspring has never been a
qualification for marriage. George Washington oftenreferred to as
"theFatherofOurcountry,did not have children with his wife Martha Custis,
and neither did four other married US presidents have children with their
wives. [9]

Same-sex marriage is a civil right. The 1967 Supreme Court case Loving v.
Virginia confirmed that marriage is "one of the basic civil rights of man," [60]
and same-sex marriages should receive the same protections given to
interracial marriages by that ruling. The NAACP (National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People), on May 19, 2012, named same-sex
marriage as "one of the key civil rights struggles of our time." [61]