NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Introduction Within our society and the western hemisphere, it is believed that only a man and a woman should be allowed to participate in the sacred ritual of marriage. These beliefs are instilled through the socialization of society and family. Our society illustrates marriage through the media. Our family illustrates marriage by first hand experience.
In a traditional family, we perceive a man and a woman as our parents. Traditionally, people marry with the expectation that reproduction will occur, and one will grow old along side of children, and grandchildren. There is an image to marriage, and the thought of altering that to include same sex unions is disturbing to many. Gay or same sex marriages have a negative connotation in our society and many others across the globe. Same sex marriage is seen as sinful, or against the laws of nature to many people in the western hemisphere, especially in the U. S.
The debate on gay or same sex marriages in the United States has produced an enormous amount of attention. To legalize same-sex marriages, or at least recognize civil unions is recently the hot topic of debate for the state, legislation, and federal governments. The following states, Vermont, Massachusetts, Hawaii, and California have recently recognized same sex marriages under the label of civil unions in lieu of complying with DOMA. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) introduced on May 7, 1996 does two things.
First, it ensures that no State shall be required to give effect to a law or any other State without respect to a same sex marriage. Secondly, it defines the word marriage and spouse for the purpose of Federal and to eliminate lope-holes. It was a bill passed to define and protect the institution of marriage. Historical Content on Same Sex Marriage Between 1990 and 2000 Hawaii and Vermont addressed the issue of legalizing same sex marriages. However, in 1996 the U. S.
Federal Constitution mandated the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which was created to keep any state from acknowledging same sex marriages (Kranz & Cusick, 2000, p. 12). DOMA stated, "No state is required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of another such organization with respect to a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other organizations or a right or claim arising from such relationship, and marriage is the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife (Stewart, 2003, p. 32). The state of Vermont accepted and promoted same sex marriages by classifying them as civil unions in order to maneuver around DOMA. Vermont believed that civil unions would provide lesbian and gay individuals with financial and emotional benefits that are accessible to heterosexual individuals who are married (Kranz & Cusick, 2000). Vermont's objectives were to provide an inclusive versus separation and discrimination reality for fellow Vermonters (Kranz & Cusick, 2000). In 1998, Hawaii's state legislation implemented the DOMA amendment that altered the states constitution and rejected same sex marriages. 28 states passed laws preventing the recognition of same sex marriages (Kranz & Cusick, 2000).
Between 1995 and 2000, the 28 states that prevented same sex marriages from being legal were Utah, Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Virginia, Alabama, Alaska, Iowa, Kentucky, Washington, and Hawaii. In 2000, the remaining 19 states didnt have an explicit ban on same sex marriages which included Colorado, Connecticut, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming (Kranz & Cusick, 2000). Within those remaining states same sex marriages are not legal-it simply has not been explicitly prohibited (Kranz & Cusick, 2000). Today approximately 40 states have statutes or constitutional amendments banning gay marriage. In some states, including Virginia, there is legislation that extends beyond gay marriage, voiding civil unions or domestic partnerships that have been entered into in other states. On the other hand, Louisiana voters overwhelmingly approved a state constitutional amendment in September banning same-sex marriages and civil unions, but a state judge threw out the amendment on October 5.
Similar amendments are on the ballot this fall in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Utah. And while the California Supreme Court voided 4, 037 same-sex marriages sanctioned by San Francisco earlier this year, Senior Judge Wayne R. Harris ordered Benton County officials in Oregon to resume issuing marriage licenses to gay couples (Gajewski, 2004). Critique of the policy They are always pros and cons to any issue that can influence social, emotional, financial, or political views.
This becomes even more evident when it involves a controversial topic such as same sex marriages. The positive results of same sex marriages for the participants are the emotional and financial rights and responsibilities that marriage embraces. Same sex partners are seeking the right to the accessibility of health care coverage, inheritance of property, without paying taxes, hospital visitation rights as a significant other, taking care of a disabled partner, having recognition of a legitimate life partnership, and the right to adopt (Kranz & Cusick, 2000). The denial of these rights become of the utmost concern, especially when it comes to custodial rights. Gay and lesbian couples are increasingly likely to have children. Legal acknowledgement of these parental relationships is growing, through increasing custody battles, such as this ongoing case of a lesbian couple: Janet Jenkins and Lisa Miller who lived in Hamilton, V.
A, but traveled to Vermont to enter into a civil union. On April 2002, Janet and Lisa had a daughter, Isabella, through artificial insemination. Lisa carried the child to term but both women worked in concert to select a sperm donor and to raise Isabella. A few months after Isabella's birth, the family moved to Fair Haven, Vt.
Lisa and Janet's relationship ended in mid- 2003, and Lisa returned to Virginia with Isabella. In November 2003, Lisa began a legal proceeding in Vermont to dissolve her civil union to Janet. As part of her lawsuit, Lisa asked the Vermont courts to grant her custody over Isabella and to compel Janet to pay child support. In June 2004, the Vermont Family Court issued an order that awarded Janet visitation rights in both Vermont and Virginia. Notwithstanding the Vermont order, on July 1, 2004, the date that Virginia's Affirmation of Marriage Act took effect, Lisa filed a second suit concerning Isabella, but this time in a Virginia court.
Frederick County Judge John Prosser held that he had jurisdiction to hear the case and, in October, granted full custody to Lisa, reasoning that, legally, Janet was no more than a friend to Isabella. With this Virginia ruling in her favor, Lisa returned to Vermont and asked Family Court Judge William Cohen to give full faith and credit to the Virginia decision. Judge Cohen rejected the request and denied Lisa's bid for permission to appeal. Lisa's refusal to comply with the visitation terms of the Vermont order led to the issuance of a Sept. 2, 2004, contempt order against her by the Vermont court.
In November, Judge Cohen ruled that Janet has all the same rights over Isabella as any other legal parent, reasoning that couples joined in a civil union should be treated no differently than married couples who choose to conceive a child through artificial insemination. Cohen explicitly ruled that it was in Isabella's best interest for her to have "two mommies. " Proceedings are ongoing in both Virginia and Vermont (Cahn, 2005, p. 22). Circumstances such as these are used to challenge the Defense of Marriage Act and the authority of states to deny recognition of civil unions at their discretion. DOMA was established to prevent homosexuals from exporting same sex marriages to other states. Florida is one of those states that will absolutely not recognize same sex marriages performed in other states. An article in the St.
Petersburg Times, headlined a story on January 20, 2005 in which a Florida Federal Judge denied two Bradenton women recognition of their marriage in Massachusetts. This was the first federal lawsuit that attempted to force other states and the federal government to recognize a marriage that occurred in a state where same sex marriages are legal, against DOMA. Contrary to this story, gay couples married in Massachusetts, or joined in civil unions in Vermont, and domestic partnerships in California, are recognized as civil unions and now have many of the same rights of legal parenthood as other marital couples. States can recognize a policy from another state as long as it does not violate their own public policy. This is similar to the manner in which some states do not recognize professional licenses such as law and medical licenses. Research suggests that an enormous amount of same sex families are providing the necessary care and shelter for children without causing social or emotional damage.
The American Association of Pediatrics supported same sex partners in regards to child adoption in that they can provide a healthy family environment for children, similar to that of a heterosexual household (Stewart, 2003). According to the American Bar Association study that was carried out in 1988, it was founded that eight to ten million children were being raised by homosexual households averaging three million gay households in the U. S (Mohr, 1994). Data from the 2000 U.
S Census revealed that approximately one in three lesbian / bisexual couples and 22 percent of gay / bisexual couples are raising children (Gomes, 2003, p. 14). On the other hand, conservatives base their argument on the notion that the same sex marriages influence negative effects towards biological, religious and moral aspects of the norms in society. For example, allowing gay individuals to marry would reduce, or damage reproductive levels, which would be contrary to the religious term, be fruitful and multiply. Secondly, the traditional family structure would be unstable for the children because it would lead to problems of discrimination, and prejudice at school and in other social institutions. The conservatives believe that approving same sex marriages would create a domino affect which would allow any types of marriages to be legal (Kranz & Cusick, 2000, p. 311). Issues addressing the right of homosexuals to live normal lives, with the same rights as other citizens is often publicly discussed.
Those who continue to oppose same-sex marriages or civil unions are full of discrimination, prejudice, and are judging others on religious grounds. Ironically, individuals who are religious, should not even be judging others if they are true to their faith. Society will always have prejudices towards others the government is promoting this prejudice against homosexual people. I feel that if the government chooses not to grant the right for these individuals to be married then it can at least create an amendment to solely describe civil unions. Many of these partners are dedicated to building a life with their companions. They deserve the same benefits and security that heterosexual couples are entitled to.
References Brink, G. January 20, 2005). Federal judge throws out Florida couples same sex marriage suit. St.
Petersburg Times: Florida. Cahn, N. (February 28, 2005). Between two mommies: When gay unions dissolve children bring special complications. Legal Times. (p. 22). Gomes, C. (Nov/Dec 2003). Partners as parents: Challenges faced by gay denied marriage.
Humanist. (63) 6, (p. 14 - 20). Gajewski, K. A. (Nov/Dec 2004). WORTH NOTING. Humanist, (64) 6, (p. 45).
Kranz R. & Cusick T. (2000). Library in a Book; Gay Rights. New York, NY: Facts on File. Mohr, D. R. 1994). A More Perfect Union.
Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Stewart, C. (2003). Gay and Lesbian Issues. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC CILO.
Free research essays on topics related to: western hemisphere, artificial insemination, defense of marriage act, civil unions, sex marriages
Research essay sample on Defense Of Marriage Act Civil Unions
