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
A Case for Same-Sex Marriages During the last presidential election cycle in the United States, the issue of same-sex marriage became one of the most divisive and contentious political and moral issues in America. Many, particularly religious conservatives, believe that marriage can only be sanctioned by God if it takes place between a man and a woman. Others see same-sex marriages as a threat to the moral fiber of a nation and as a threat to the traditional family structure. On the other hand, gay couples seek the same formal commitment of marriage that heterosexual couples have.
Same-sex couples not only want the legal and civil protections of marriage, but they also want the formal bond and the family unit a marriage creates. Environment, culture, and upbringing determine how people view homosexuality and same-sex marriage. The issue is polarizing. For those who are homophobic, or who cannot conceptualize same-sex relationships, marriage between couples of the same sex is inconceivable. Many, perhaps because they fear anything that they cannot comprehend, feel threatened by the notion that gay couples could have the same marriages as heterosexual couples.
Same-sex marriage is not an issue of morality or spirituality, however. It is a matter of affording the same rights, privileges, and legal protections, including marriage, to all citizens, no matter what their sexual orientation might be. As Haider-Markel, Joslyn, and Kiss point out, domestic partner policies have become a significant issue in lesbian and gay politics (570). For years, the gay community has fought to attain for gays the same civil liberties and legal protections all citizens enjoy. While political progress has been made on the issue of gay rights, when the issue becomes same-sex marriage, controversies arise.
In many areas, gay marriage is still illegal. With the inability to legally marry, according to Haider-Markel, Joslyn, and Kiss, many gay advocates have proposed policies for same-sex couples that in essence mimic marriage and sanction them as couples (570). For some gay couples, however, the issue is not only one of civil liberties and legal protection within their partnerships, but it is a matter of being allowed to marry and have a union based on love, commitment, and the choice of two equal partners (Wolfson). In his speech to the National Conference of Editorial Writers, attorney Evan Wolfson argues that it is time to have a civil rights conversation on marriage rights. For Wolfson, this is a matter of equality, and as long as marriage is denied to same-sex couples, then they are not enjoying the same rights as heterosexual couples.
Wolfson does not believe that civil unions are enough because they are a second-class institution that confers some, but not all, of the benefits of a legal marriage. Wolfson also points out that a government, not the church, issues marriage licenses, making marriage a legal and civil matter, not a religious matter. His argument is that by denying some citizens the right to marry, a government is denying some of its citizens their civil rights (Wolfson). The question remains whether or not gay people can be considered a separate class of people from heterosexual people. For many, marriage represents a control over ones relationships and a formal bond that marks ones commitment to ones chosen partner. It is a bond that is both legal and personal, and it is exactly the same bond heterosexual couples enjoy.
When two people enter into a marriage, they make a legal and moral commitment to honor the relationship. According to Mary Hunt, allowing same-sex marriage will provide relational justice for all couples (36). She further argues that heterosexual marriages are not a right, but a privilege (36). If Hunts argument is valid, then denying same-sex couples the right to marry also denies them their civil liberties. Like Wolfson, Hunt believes that as long as gay couples cannot enter into the same state of marriage as heterosexual couples, then they are not being treated equally as citizens (36).
Hunt views marriage as a legal state and not one that can be sanctioned or denied by clergy, and she points out that the laws tend to benefit those in society who are married. Paul Burka, who lives in Travis County, Texas, the only county in Texas to approve gay marriage, believes that by voting for same-sex marriage, he was upholding the freedom of the individual and the order of society. He believes that society does not have a right to institutionalize a preference for heterosexuality. According to Burka, gay people should be protected by the same laws as heterosexual people, and they should be allowed the same privileges, such as marriage.
As he points out, public policy should be fair to everyone within a society (14). Many same-sex couples believe that marriage will provide a family unit that can include children. Many gay couples who wish to raise children want to do so within the structure and commitment that marriage provides to heterosexual couples. One of the common arguments against same-sex marriages is that they are not only not the same as heterosexual unions, but that they also undermine the morality of a culture and the sanctity of the family unit. At the center of many of these arguments against same-sex marriages is the issue of raising children as a married couple of the same sex.
Many child advocates who oppose same-sex marriage use the argument that the children of these unions will face insurmountable difficulties in the world as a result of these marriages. For those who view homosexuality as immoral and a sinful state, there is a concern that these children are being raised in an immoral environment (Stacey and Biblarz 160). One prevailing sentiment among those who oppose same-sex marriage is that the children raised in these unions will somehow be corrupted and that they will not grow into normal, emotionally healthy adults. There is also a fear, perhaps irrational, that the homosexuality of the parents will somehow carry over to the children even though there seems to be no study indicating that there is a greater incidence of homosexuality among children raised by gay couples than there is among children raised by heterosexual couples (Stacey and Biblarz 160).
As gay marriage has begun to be legalized in many countries around the world, several sociological studies have been done to determine the effects on children of being raised by same-sex couples who have entered into marriage. According to Stacey and Biblarz, thus far the bodies of research have shown no notable differences between children reared by heterosexual parents and those reared by lesbian and gay parents (161). For many gay couples, the civil and legal standing that marriage gives all couples also protects the children who are raised within these same-sex unions. Meezan and Rausch make the point that same-sex marriages bring three major benefits that are then conferred onto the children in the family. The first advantage is that the legal and civil benefits a marriage provides help to provide for the well-being of the children when gay couples receive through marriage family leave and spousal insurance. Should one of the marriage partners die or become disabled, a same sex-marriage can provide financial continuity.
The same protections that are extended to spouses and children of heterosexual couples would be provided for the spouses and children of same-sex marriages. Without the legal protection of marriage, the rights and security of gay partners and children are uncertain. Second, having their parents in a marriage demonstrates to children that their family is durable and stable. Whether the parents of children are gay or heterosexual, all children benefit from being in stable homes where the parents have committed and binding relationships. Finally, if same sex-marriage becomes legal and socially acceptable, then the children will gain more social acceptance (97 - 98). If a society is able to recognize the relationships and marriages of all couples, gay or heterosexual, then the children who are raised in those homes can gain acceptance.
Society needs to reach a point where children from gay families are regarded no differently than children from heterosexual families. There is no research indicating that children might be harmed if their same-sex parents were allowed to marry (Meezan and Rausch 109). In fact, according to Meezan and Rausch, the benefits of social acceptability for both the same-sex couple and the children might be enhanced if gay couples are legally able to enter in to marriage (109). Research does indicate that marriage between heterosexual couples helps tie them to their children. While there is yet no research that indicates that marriage between same-sex couples would have the same effect, it seems reasonable to assume that it would (Meezan and Rausch 110). Of course, there are those that argue with the early social science research on the effects of same-sex marriage on the children.
Wardle, a Brigham Young University law professor, has questioned the motives of the researchers and accused the social science community of having a bias toward gay rights. At the same time, he called for having children being raised by gay couples removed from their homes and placed with heterosexual couples. In general, the sociological research concerning the potential effects on children within same-sex marriages has been jeopardized. Those, like Wardle, who accuse the social scientists conducting this research of having a gay-rights agenda, have questioned the validity of this research (Stacey and Biblarz 160). As long as the issues of same-sex marriage and gay couples raising children increase the levels of homophobia in a society, it will become more difficult for the social scientists to conduct valid research. Since same-sex marriage has become such a passionate issue for both those who support it and those who oppose it, there has been an increase in the research on the issues of gay marriage and how it will affect society, culture, and children raised by married gay couples (Stacey and Biblarz 171).
It may be some time before there are any conclusive findings on these issues. Given the emotional reaction to the issue of same-sex marriage, it may be years, especially in America, before the issue is resolved. Of all the issues surrounding same sex marriage, the one of social acceptability is the most complex. Being accepted by society as a couple within a marital relationship is crucial to those same-sex couples who wish to marry, particularly those who wish to raise children within a marriage.
As Mary Hunt points out, gay people differ from heterosexual people only in their sexual orientations. They work in all occupations, and they have the same hopes and dreams that all human beings have. Like heterosexuals, they want stable relationships with the people they love and respect, and they want to be able to commit to those relationships through marriage. Meezan and Rausch observe that society has a preference for marriage over non marriage (98). Yet, for the most part, society extends that preference only to heterosexual couples. Meezan and Rausch believe, however, that if it preferable for heterosexual couples to marry, then it should also be preferable for same-sex couples to marry (98).
For gay people, there have always been issues of social acceptability, especially within conservative communities. Those who are homophobic will not accept known gay people into their social circle. There are those who believe that gay people are committing a sin against God and thus, represent evil. In modern society, gay people have been isolated, attacked physically and verbally, and have been thrown out of their churches and told that they are doomed to Hell.
Churches have a significant influence over their parishioners, and although the church has no legal standing in terms of sanctioning marriage, it does dictate to some what is or is not morally acceptable. As Meezan and Rausch point out, because of social rejection, gay couples often establish affiliations with gay groups within their community to attain the social acceptance and approval they do not get from the heterosexual community (98). This lack of social acceptance by the heterosexual community also has the effect of further isolating the children of these relationships. Gay couples isolation within their communities makes it more difficult for sociologists to research the effects on children of growing up in same-sex households (Meezan and Rausch 99).
Since the issue of gay marriage is one that is not likely to go away, it seems that society is eventually going to have to resolve itself to the reality of gay marriages. As Haider-Markel, Joslyn, and Kiss assert, not only are heterosexual individuals in society going to have to come to terms with gay marriage, but the politicians who represent all constituents, heterosexual and homosexual, are going to have to define their stances on the issues of gay marriage and decide what kinds of legislation on these issues they are going to advocate (575). Gay rights activists are aware of the power of political organization, and they have begun to use their political powers to campaign for same-sex marriage. Many politicians can no longer ignore this constituency, because, as Haider-Markel, Joslyn, and Kiss point out, in areas where gay groups have strong political organization, they have gained political influence (572).
Meezan and Rausch believe that any society's acceptance of same-sex marriages cannot be forced even if same-sex marriages are legalized. While making these unions legal would remove the legal and civil impediments, the authors feel it might actually create another stigma with which gay spouses and their children might have to deal (105). The legitimizing of same-sex marriage will not erase the highly contentious, highly complex emotions that some segments of the heterosexual population have concerning homosexuality and the issues with which the gay population must deal. In many minds, legally allowing these marriages is immoral. For many, particularly those who consider themselves conservative Christians who are following Gods word, the views of their churches and their ministers will be far more persuasive than laws. Meezan and Rausch feel that if social acceptance is ever realized, it will be a gradual process, one that will require time and education (105).
While the courts, legislators, and voters struggle with the issue of same-sex marriage, the fact is that there are many children who are members of nuclear families comprised of same-sex partners. If the community in which these families live does not accept their parents partnership, then it is probable that the children of these couples will have a more difficult time finding acceptance. As Stacey and Biblarz point out, these families with same-sex partners not only wish to legally marry, but they are also trying to secure recognition by society for their partnerships and nuclear family structure (159). One of the impediments to social acceptance of same-sex marriage is that many of the notions that exist about families, marriages, gender, and relationships are in opposition to many of the convictions Western culture has about what exactly comprises a family (Stacey and Biblarz 160). When adults in a community are struggling with the issues of homosexuality and same-sex marriages, it will remain difficult for the children of these unions to find acceptance within the community. Preliminary research indicates that children of gay parents are raised in much the same way as children of heterosexual parents.
It is the perception within some communities that these children are living in corrupt and depraved households that leads to the notion that these children are somehow different from other children (Stacey and Biblarz 160). Essentially, because the parents are perceived as human anomalies, the children being parented by same-sex parents must share the same stigma as their parents. Since same-sex marriage is a complex and emotional issue, it will be impossible to legislate society's acceptance of these unions, or, for that matter, the acceptance of homosexuality itself. In recent years, in many nations, including the United States, gay individuals as well as gay partners have been able to secure more legal and civil rights. While, this is progress, it is not enough. If a nation is truly going to grant equal rights to all of its citizens, then it is going to have to extend to same-sex couples the right to marry and to enjoy the same legal rights and protections married heterosexual couples have.
More importantly, society is going to have to eventually resolve itself to the social acceptance of all marriages, whether they are between heterosexual or same-sex couples. Until this happens, same-sex couples will not enjoy the same rights as heterosexual couples. Works Cited Burka, Paul. The M Word.
Texas Monthly 34 (January 2006): 14 - 15. Haider-Markel, Donald P. , Mark R. Joslyn, and Chad J. Kiss. Minority Group Interests and Political Representation: Gay Elected Officials in the Policy Process. The Journal of Politics 62. 2 (May, 2000): 568 - 577.
Hunt, Mary E. Catholics for a Free Choice. Conscience 26. 2 (Summer 2005): 36 - 38. Meezan, William and Jonathan Rausch. Gay Marriage, Same-Sex Parenting, and Americas Children. The Future of Children 15. 2 (Fall 2005): 97 - 115.
Nelson, Gary E. Evan Wolfson Argues for Marriage Rights For Same-Sex Partners. The Masthead 57. 14 (Winter 2005): 25 - 6. Info Trac One File. 24 Jan. 2006 web Stacey, Judith and Timothy J.
Biblarz. (How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter? American Sociological Review 66. 2 (Apr. 2001): 159 - 183.
Free research essays on topics related to: sex marriage, effects on children, civil liberties, heterosexual couples, gay couples
Research essay sample on Effects On Children Heterosexual Couples
