https://kylefoote.wordpress.

com/2011/08/01/gay-marriage-position-
paper/

Gay Marriage – Position Paper August 1, 2011

Filed under: ENGL 2010 — kylefoote @ 10:44 pm

Introduction
Many people are against Gay marriage, while, at the same time, in support
of civil unions (Dudley). Many Gay marriage opponents disagree based
solely on the use of the word “marriage.” Those opponents to same sex
marriage feel that the term marriage is defined by societal norms or
established by religious tradition and should be limited to only define a
relationship between a man and a woman. Opponents to Gay marriage
based solely on the use of the word “marriage point out that “from a legal
perspective, marriage and civil unions extend the same benefits” (Smith).
The semantic debate over what to call Gay marriage however fails to take
into account the true nature of what Gays seek and what opponents
oppose. Gays seek full marriage equality in word and in deed, not a
separate but equal status. We must move the debate beyond terminology
and focus on the issue of why Gays deserve equal access to all rights,
specifically the right to marry.
Arguments for Gay Marriage
One of the biggest arguments for Gay marriage is the right to be a spouse’s
legal partner. In most cases, current State, Federal and local law will find
against the rights of the non-marred partner to make medical decisions for
their significant other. In marriage, when a partner is injured or killed, the
law recognizes the married partner as the next of kin; therefore, they are
able to make the decisions for the incapacitated partner. When the law
doesn’t extend equal rights to a same sex couple you find cases like that of
the lesbian couple the author and Gay marriage advocate William Dudley
wrote about.
Karen Thompson and Sharon Kowalski are spouses in every respect except
the legal. They exchanged vows and rings; they lived
together until Nov 13, 1983 – when Ms. Kowalski was severely injured when
her car was struck by a drunk driver. She lost the
capacity to walk or to speak more than several words at a time, and needed
constant care. Ms. Thompson sought a court ruling
granting her guardianship over her partner, but Ms. Kowalski’s parents
opposed the petition and obtained sole guardianship.
They moved Ms. Kowalski to a nursing home 300 miles away from Ms.
Thompson and forbade all visits between the two
women.
This is a clear example of one of the biggest obstacles facing the Gay
population of America today. Gays fear having a loved one in the emergency
room and not being able to see them because we are not legally recognized
as family. Under current law the State can deny the rights of the individual
who is incapacitated to have his or her partner in life be the one that makes
the decision on their well being. Ms. Kowalski’s family completely
disregarded what their daughter would have wanted, because of their
beliefs, and the law offered no protection to her and her partner when they
needed it most.
Another argument for Gay marriage is that it promotes family values and
would increase social stability, as Dudley wrote in his book:
Those who argue against reforming the marriage statutes because they
believe that same sex marriage would be “anti- family”
overlook the obvious: marriage creates families and promotes social
stability. In an increasingly loveless world, those who wish
to commit themselves to a relationship founded upon devotion should be
encouraged, not scorned. Government has no
legitimate interest in how that love is expressed. And it can no longer be
argued – if it ever could – that marriage is fundamentally a
procreative unit. Otherwise, states would forbid marriage between those
who, by reason of age or infertility, cannot have children, as
well as those who elect not to.
While many Gay people argue the fact that they want marriage rights, just
to let the world know they are in love with their partner and intend to spend
the rest of their lives together; the more important argument is the benefits
that marriage would give them. As Dudley pointes out, “Marriage is not just
a symbolic state. Marriage triggers a universe of rights, privileges and
presumptions.” There are over 1300 rights, privileges and legal protections
granted to married couples that are not available to same sex couples
under current law (Smith).
Arguments Against Gay Marriage
There are many people who feel Gay marriage is immoral and not normal.
These views are sanctioned by many religions along with the majority of the
right-wing party of America. This argument is based on the view that
marriage is between a man and a woman, and deviating from that would
open “Pandora’s Box.” “Authorizing the marriage of homosexuals, like
sanctioning polygamy, would be unenlightened social policy. The law
should reserve the celebration of marriage vows for monogamous male-
female attachments to further the goal of psychologically, emotionally and
educationally balanced offspring” (Dudley). In other words Gay marriage
leads to further disruption of family values by other groups such as
polygamists.
In another argument, Gay marriage opponents argue that marriage is for
the benefit of procreation, and that it is simply a biological argument. “The
ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has
its basis in biology, not bigotry”(McKinnon). It is a natural thing for a man
and woman to be together, have children and create a family. “Marriage
encourages a long-term relationship between a man and a woman as
framework for caring for their children. In such a construct, in their view,
the population is replenished, and children are raised responsibly and are
less likely to be a social and financial burden on the state” (Rivera).
Many of these arguments are argued on a religious basis. People from the
religious right, like those from the National Organization for Marriage, use
scripture to talk about the act of homosexuality as being unnatural and
sinful, such as the Bible, the Torah, and the Quran. The researcher R.
Bilodeau eloquently makes this point:
Of America’s three major religious sectors, all object to homosexual
marriage. In the book of Romans of the Christian Bible,
Paul writes, “…for even their women did change the natural use into that
which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the
natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one towards another: men
with men.” Jewish scriptures the sternly states,
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.”
Evan the Quran, the Islamic Holy Book, asks, “Would ye
really approach men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, ye are a people
grossly ignorant!” These quotes, from Holy Books which possess
the tenets of 80 percent of America’s population and 65
percent of the world’s, all clearly oppose homosexuality.
Those who oppose gay marriage based on religion use scripture and
doctrine, like that pointed out above, to continue their opposition and even
invoke the name of God as they condemn those who would seek to obtain
equal marriage rights for same sex couples.
Gay marriage opponents from the religious right feel that religion and the
church design the term ‘marriage’, and that it is something that should be
decided by a church. These same people are sometimes fine with the term
‘civil union’, this gives Gay people the same benefits; while also giving the
pro-family people a way out of feeling that they are being overtaken by Gay
and liberal activists. Civil Union proponents who oppose the use of the word
marriage argue as Scott suggests in her book:
The first advantage of civil-union status over marriage is that it is wholly
secular. Marriage is a religious sacrament as well as a legal
status, and its civil and religious dimensions are inextricably linked. To be
sure, some couples are married by secular authorities such as
judges, but the modern status of marriage continues to be embedded in its
historical traditions as a religious institution.
Civil union proponents would further argue that the word marriage is
unnecessary and that it is the rights that matter, not what you call it.
A Heated Debate
While every one has his own opinion when discussing this argument, it is
clear that it is a very heated subject within the United States. In the 2008
elections, there were several initiatives in different States; the most notable
being Proposition 8 in California. Unfortunately every initiative was voted
down, which was definitely a stunning blow for Gay rights advocates.
The most important reason that the Gay community wants to be able to
marry is the concern that they are left out in this legal system. Many of the
people, who argue against Gay marriage, do it solely on a religious basis.
They fear the change that will overtake our society that would come with
legal Gay marriages. They say that Gay marriages would destroy the family
and the institution of marriage. It is unclear if this would actually happen;
or if these people are just really trying to exclude an entire group of people
based on prejudices and hatred.
A Weak Argument
The argument that straight marriages would suffer due to legalizing Gay
marriage is weak. To start with, straight marriages are not very successful
and should not be used as a blanket example of what should be. According
to Divorcerate.com, the average divorce rate is 40 % today (Baker).
If laws allowing Gay marriage were to be passed they would make the world
a better place for Gay people as well as the straight community.
Heterosexual marriages would go on as normal and Gay marriage will not
lead to an increase in the dissolution of Heterosexual marriages. According
to Champan “It’s not as though any heterosexual couples lose anything
from the change. And the effect of letting Gays wed is bound to be healthy
for everyone, since marriage fosters long-term relationships, discourages
irresponsible sexual behavior and offers a tested means of protecting
children”.
The reason is clear, marriage is the way our civil laws recognize the legally
and binding pairing of two people, and this should never exclude anyone
who intends to spend the rest of their lives together, regardless of sexual
orientation. As Eva McKinnon points out:
Every year more than two million people are joined in marriage and are
entitled to all federal, state, and local benefits that a civil
marriage license affords them. Of those two million people, virtually none
identifies themselves as homosexual. Due to federal and
state laws, homosexual couples are not allowed to marry in the United
States thus, are not able to receive any of the benefits
marriage affords. This marriage inequality is an unnecessary injustice to
those who are kept from participating in it and is
important because America is supposed to be the land of freedom and
equality for all.
It is time to drop the partisan and exclusive nature of the anti-Gay marriage
group and include Gay people into the rights of legal marriage. It is unfair
and wrong to exclude same sex couples from the institution of marriage. In
America, we pride ourselves on being the ‘land of the free’, however we
exclude a large number of people from living their lives freely with the
ability to decide what is best for them, and who they get to spend their lives
with. We as Americans should urge congress to immediately repeal the
Defense of Marriage Act and fight to extend equal rights to every American,
including Gays and Lesbians.
Works Cited
Baker, Jennifer. “Divorce Statistics in America.” Divorcestatistics.org. Forest
Institute
of Professional Psychology, 3 Feb. 2010. Web. 20 June 2011.
Bilodeau, R. “Gay Marriage Is Unnatural.” Ramcigar.com. College Media
Network, 17
Mar. 2004. Web. 20 June 2011.
Chapman, Steve. Townhall.com. Creators Syndicate, 19 Oct. 2008. Web. 20
June 2011.
Dudley, William. Homosexuality: Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego, CA:
Greenhaven,
1993. Print.
McKinnon, Ava. “Marriage Inequality.” Associatedcontent.com. Ava
McKinnon, 19
Sept. 2007. Web. 20 June 2011.
Rivera, Ray, and Christine Stuart. “Using Biology, Not Religion, to Argue
Against
Same Sex Marriage.” New York Times 12 Oct. 2008, New York ed., sec. A:
45. Print.
Scott, Elizabeth. “The Future of Marriage.” Family Law Quarterly 41.3 (2008):
17-65.
Print.
Smith, Jennifer. The Gay Rights Movement. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven,
2003. Print.