Gay marriage essay for

Gay marriage the arguments and the motives

Gay marriage the arguments and the motives
An essay on why the arguments against gay marriage dont hold up in the light of reason.

Same-sex couple ariel owens (r) and his spouse joseph barham walk arm in arm after they were married at san francisco city hall june 17, 2008 in san francisco, california. I cannot imagine how we benefit as a society by doing so. The second argument i often hear is that traditional marriage furthers the states interest in procreationand that opening marriage to same-sex couples would dilute, diminish, and devalue this goal. Americans who believe in the words of the declaration of independence, in lincolns gettysburg address, in the 14th amendment, and in the constitutions guarantees of equal protection and equal dignity before the law cannot sit by while this wrong continues. There is plenty of history of the gay marriage movement before sullivans essay, but his advocacy helped bring it in to the mainstream.

Sullivan is now officially a retired blogger. At the same time, california prohibits marriage by loving, caring, stable partners of the same sex, but tries to make up for it by giving them the alternative of domestic partnerships with virtually all of the rights of married persons except the official, state-approved status of marriage. To a very large extent, these characteristics are immutable, like being left-handed. These decisions have generated controversy, of course, but they are decisions of the nations highest court on which our clients are entitled to rely. But while the supreme court has always previously considered marriage in that context, the underlying rights and liberties that marriage embodies are not in any way confined to heterosexuals.

At the end of the civil war, to make the elusive promise of equality a reality, the 14th amendment to the constitution added the command that no state é shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law nor deny to any person é the equal protection of the laws. I have been particularly moved by many personal renditions of how lonely and personally destructive it is to be treated as an outcast and how meaningful it will be to be respected by our laws and civil institutions as an american, entitled to equality and dignity. A lot of the themes from sullivans original essay inclusion, social cohesion, responsibility, and family support are echoed in todays decision, written by no union is more profound than marriage, for it embodiesthe highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,and family. I thought the book, at least, would be something i would have to leave behind me secure in the knowledge that its arguments were, in fact, logically irrefutable, and would endure past my own death, at least somewhere. And we are also telling them, those who love them, and society as a whole that their relationships are less worthy, less legitimate, less permanent, and less valued. Whats more, it is pernicious to think marriage should be limited to heterosexuals because of the states desire to promote procreation. As it has become more acceptable for gay people to acknowledge their loves publicly, more and more have committed themselves to one another for life in full view of their families and their friends, a law institutionalizing gay marriage would merely reinforce a healthy social trend. We once tolerated laws throughout this nation that prohibited marriage between persons of different races. Many religions and much of our social culture have reinforced those impulses. The united states supreme court has repeatedly held that marriage is one of the most fundamental rights that we have as americans under our constitution.

Read the essay that helped start the gay marriage movement in
Jun 25, 2015 andrew sullivan wrote a cover story for the new republic arguing for gay marriage. It was at the time a radical proposition although sullivans.

Why same-sex marriage is an american value. Together with my good friend and occasional courtroom adversary david boies, i am attempting to persuade a federal.

Preventing lesbians and gays from marrying does not cause more heterosexuals to marry and conceive more children. Sadly, our nation has taken a long time to live up to the promise of equality. They wish to be represented in court to seek vindication of that right by mounting a challenge under the united states constitution to the validity of proposition 8 under the equal-protection and due-process clauses of the 14th amendment. Yet veterans of past civil-rights battles found that it was the act of insisting on equal rights that ultimately sped acceptance of those rights. Sullivan recalls a moment debating gay marriage on tv shortly after his essay came out.

I understand, but reject, certain religious teachings that denounce homosexuality as morally wrong, illegitimate, or unnatural and i take strong exception to those who argue that same-sex relationships should be discouraged by society and law. And, while our constitution guarantees the freedom to exercise our individual religious convictions, it equally prohibits us from forcing our beliefs on others. It was at the time a radical proposition although sullivans argument came from a philosophically conservative place. No matter what you think of homosexuality, it is a fact that gays and lesbians are members of our families, clubs, and workplaces. Most americans are proud of these decisions and the fact that the discriminatory state laws that spawned them have been discredited.

We do not inquire whether heterosexual couples intend to bear children, or have the capacity to have children, before we allow them to marry. If all citizens have a constitutional right to marry, if state laws that withdraw legal protections of gays and lesbians as a class are unconstitutional, and if private, intimate sexual conduct between persons of the same sex is protected by the constitution, there is very little left on which opponents of same-sex marriage can rely. Many religions and much of our social culture have reinforced those impulses. Californias supreme court was the first to find that discrimination unconstitutional. The second argument i often hear is that traditional marriage furthers the states interest in procreationand that opening marriage to same-sex couples would dilute, diminish, and devalue this goal. What, then, are the justifications for californias decision in proposition 8 to withdraw access to the institution of marriage for some of its citizens on the basis of their sexual orientation? The reasons i have heard are not very persuasive. In forming a marital union, two people becomesomething greater than once they were. The dream that became america began with the revolutionary concept expressed in the declaration of independence in words that are among the most noble and elegant ever written we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The simple fact is that there is no good reason why we should deny marriage to same-sex partners. The supreme court has said that marriage is a part of the constitutions protections of liberty, privacy, freedom of association, and spiritual identification.

Andrew sullivan why gay marriage is good for america