Same sex marriage is an issue that arises concerns with a lot of people. Some agree, some disagree, and some just really don’t care. I fall under two categories. I disagree, but I really don’t care. The reasons being are I stick with God’s words. He made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve or Eve and Ava. God also said judge not for you’ll be judged. I’m not perfect or anywhere near it, so I definitely don’t want to be judged. I was going to write on child hunger, but since I have to deal with this in my life now I decided to provide a written document about this subject.
One of my family members is involved in a same sex relationship for the past three years. Although I don’t agree I still have love for them. Just recently, they’ve decided that they want to be married. That arises and issue with me because although I don’t judge them; I definitely won’t be apart of the wedding and celebration. I couldn’t see myself condoning a marriage with the vows of God for a couple of the same sex. I do have standards and I do know how to take a stand. I tried to broaden my thoughts and think about it for a moment, but it still wasn’t working for me.
So, I decided to do a little research and see what’s really going on with the same sex marriages. As I began to obtain information I was stunned about a lot of things. The facts I found out were surprising to me. I learned that the movement to open civil marriage to same-sex couples achieved its first temporary success in 1993 with the decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court that the restriction of marriage to opposite-sex couples would be presumed unconstitutional unless the state could demonstrate that it furthered a compelling state interest.
In response to this decision the state constitution was amended to allow the legislature to preserve that restriction. A similar court decision in Alaska in 1998 led to an even stronger constitutional amendment, itself defining marriage as between one man and one woman. In further reaction to the Hawaii case, the federal Defense of Marriage Act 1996 provided that no state would be required to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state, and also defined marriage for federal-law purposes as opposite-sex.
The majority of the states also passed their own “marriage protection acts. ” In November 2004, eleven more U. S. states amended their constitutions to prohibit same-sex marriage. In Vermont, after that state’s Supreme Court held in 1999 that the state must extend to same- sex couples the same benefits that married couples receive, the legislature in 2000 created the status of “civil union” to fulfill that mandate. Connecticut adopted a similar civil union law in 2005.
In 2001, the Netherlands became the first country to open civil marriage to same-sex couples. Belgium became the second in 2003. In 2002 through 2004, courts in six Canadian provinces held that the opposite-sex definition of marriage was contrary to Canada’s Charter of Rights, and in 2005 federal legislation extended same-sex marriage to all of Canada. Same-sex marriage was also legalized in Spain in 2005 , in South Africa in 2006, and in Norway effective in 2009.
In November 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that excluding same-sex couples from the benefits of civil marriage violated the state constitution, and in February 2004 that court further held that a “civil union” law would not be sufficient, and on May 17, 2004 Massachusetts became the first state in the United States where same-sex marriage per se is legal. In October 2006, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that same-sex couples were entitled to the same rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples under the civil marriage statutes.
The Legislature complied with that decision by enacting a civil union act in December 2006. In May 2008, California became the second state to legalize same-sex marriage when the California Supreme Court held that laws restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples were unconstitutional. Connecticut followed suit in October 2008. In California, the Supreme Court decision was apparently overturned by voter initiative in the November 2008 election. (Paul Axel-Lute, “Same-Sex Marriage” (Rutgers-Newark Law Library, Pathfinder Series, Oct.
1996), http://www-rci. rutgers. edu/~axellute/ssm. htm, lists articles, statutes, and cases through 1996. ) These things still did not convince me of anything and I decided I still needed more. I wanted to know why did these people of the same sex wanted to get married when it was causing so much controversy and most of the world don’t with it. I just couldn’t understand so I went to the library and got a book by the author of William Eskeridge called, Gay Marriage, For Better or For Worse.
That title really rocked me because that was the same thing that I was wondering. Is it for the better or for the worse. In his text he stated that the same-sex marriage debate to take account of the new argument against same-sex marriage, to wit: same-sex marriage in Scandinavia has destroyed the institution in those countries, and left children to be raised without married parents. That alone scares me because I was raised with two parents. (Eskridge, William N. , Gay Marriage: For Better or For Worse? What We’ve Learned from the Evidence. (Oxford Univ.
Press, 2006) If marriage between gays becomes the law of the land, married gay couples will be afforded all the legal benefits that apply to heterosexual married couples, including spousal rights to Social Security, Medicare, private pensions, the right to file joint tax returns, and the right to inherit each other’s property. Many gays say it’s about time. Others say that allowing gays to wed is wrong and will be harmful. When you ask about the good of marriage, we used to understand that the good of the thing was implied in its nature and its end.
And marriage has to be connected and we’ll have a chance to pursue this, but marriage has to be connected to that sense of sexuality imprinted in our natures, in the ineffaceable fact that we are born men or women. The purpose or meaning implicit in that sexuality is the notion of begetting, and for compelling reasons, we’ve found the prospect of begetting finding its most apt reflection in a framework of lawfulness that provides the ground on which parents are committed to the nurturance of their children for the same that they are committed to one another.
When children are involved it makes it even more hectic. The children are being taught wrong and that I definitely don’t agree with. The more I try to come to terms with this issue I just can’t seem to find enough of evidence that secures my thoughts and heart to condone this kind of thing. I know some people with disagree with me, but we agree to disagree. As time progresses I do indeed believe that eventually their will be more states and same sex laws that I don’t agree with, but I’ll still live. That’s why I’m glad I live in America so I can be entitled to my opinion.
I just pray for the children and their well-being. Although some only think of themselves they should take a stand back and think of their children. Children are our nest generation and raising them to think things are okay when they’re really wrong scares me to death. Let’s just hope that the kids will make better choices than others. Same sex marriage hasn’t yet affected my life, but as time goes on I do think it will be a part of my life. Even though my family members wish that my family member would reconsider their ideas about the whole ordeal; we must go on loving them and praying for them. Reference Page