“Gay marriage-it’s not about two people being gay: it’s about two people who love each other and who have decided to commit to each other for the exact same reasons any other couple would get married,” said Luke Macfarlane. Research states that in the Netherlands same-sex couples adopt more children than opposite married people do. The governor of New York said that more money came to the state after they allowed same-sex marriage. Although, allowing gay couples to wed could further weaken the institution of marriage, however; same-sex marriage should be allowed because history proves traditional marriage has changed, the U.S. Constitution protects our rights, and it would help boost the economy.
Some will agree traditional marriage has always
…show more content…
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced, “Gay marriage had contributed $295 million to the city’s economy since the practice became legal there in July 2011” ( Pro/Con, Should Gay Marriage be Legal?, 2012). This is important because if the states have more money then the government can do more things like raise school funding, have better homeland security, etc. Furthermore, The money going to the states will help benefit the people living in them and the rest of the country. In addition the Williams Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) stated “In the first five years after Massachusetts legalized gay marriage in 2004, same-sex wedding expenditures added $111 million to the state’s economy” (Pro/Con, Should Gay Marriage be Legal?, 2012). This shows that people who are a homosexual couple that marry they buy the same things as opposite-sex couples just their would be a lot more being bought. Also if there would be more people that would adopt children because they are people who cannot have children so there would be ever more money coming in that place too. Same-sex marriage can help with financial but it might have a chance to weaken the bond of
Since the 1970’s people have been going to court to ask the government to legalize gay marriage. From the cases in 1970’s like Loving v. Virginia and the more recent cases like United States v. Edith Windsor. In this case, Windsor and Thea were a same sex couple who were married in Canada, but they lived in New York which recognized their marriage. After Thea passed away, the estate was left with Windsor. Under federal law their marriage was not recognized, so Windsor was asked to pay taxes on the estate.
In my brief I will explore the effect of the Loving V. Virginia (1967) on the case of Obergefell V. Hodges (2015) and how it led to legalization of same sex marriage. I will prove that the 9th amendment which addresses the right to marriage did not specify that marriage should be between a man and a woman. I will also prove that the precedents set by prior cases reflected on the decision of the supreme justice. I will first explain the prior cases and discuss their rulings and reflect on the reason judges chose this. I will then discuss the Obergefell v. Hodges case and its similarity to prior cases .
This paper focuses on the Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). This paper will give an overview of the case, the major arguments made by the plaitiffs and the defendents, as well as how the case has affected other rulings. This case has answered many legal questions and will shape any future cases that deal with gay marriage, possibly even equal rights. Deatiled CH: James Obergefell and John Arthur was a same-sex couple and was married on July 11, 2013 on a medical transport plan on the tarmac at the airport in Baltimore, Maryland due to Arthur being unable to move (3,2) .
The census bureau only recently started collecting data in a way that gives us a nationally representative view of the economic lives of same-sex partnerships. After reading the Black et al article, what additional information do you think it would be important to know? i.e. what is missing from this analysis? Black et al, explores several explanatory variables in relation to same sex household such as income, college education, location, and market specialization.
This analyses that same sex couples should also have the right to marry. One of the reason why the supreme court sided with Loving was because “Decisions about marriage are among the most intimate that an individual can
Hodges (2015) the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, applying to same-sex couples the same as opposite-sex couples. This case was brought forward by numerous groups of same-sex couples who were suing their relevant state agencies to challenge the constitutionality of those states’ same-sex marriage laws. The Supreme Court found that there is no difference between same-sex marriages and opposite-sex marriages, therefore, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the right to marry violates the Due Process Clause. This is policy making because the Supreme Court forced states to change their laws by deciding that it was against the constitution to not only ban the recognition of same-sex marriages that occurred in states that allowed it, but also making same-sex marriage legal in all states. Government officials even those who do not believe in the law change must abide by it, by allowing same-sex couples their now legal right to be married and receive the benefits that opposite-sex married couples receive; changing the way that citizens and the government interact in societal ways but also financial
Huckabee stated, “This ruling is not about marriage equality, it’s about marriage redefinition. This irrational, unconstitutional rejection of the expressed will of the people in over 30 states will prove to be one of the court’s most disastrous decisions, and they have had many” (“Mike Huckabee”). Former Arkansas Governor and Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee opposes same sex marriage and believes Americans must defend, protect and preserve traditional marriage (“Values”).
Considering the political issues today same-sex marriage controversy serves to be significant as it has not been able to reach its height at the national level. As only 36 states out of 50 legally approve of same-sex marriage (Fausset and Blinder, The NewYork Times.com). Amending the Constitution for same-sex marriage serves to be a huge controversy and a difficult process due to many opinions present within the political and social circuit. Another reason many citizens do not support the idea of same-sex marriage is due to traditional social beliefs and morals. For example, many Americans oppose the idea of same-sex marriage on religious grounds.
For years gay marriage has been an issue particularly in the United States. So many countries allow same sex couples to get married but not all states in the United States agree with allowing same sex couples to be married legally. The Supreme Court has gone back and forth on this issue plenty of times and it has come down to moral and religious views and simply what people think is right or wrong. Marriage is defined as a union between two individuals. Whether the two individuals are male and female, two males, or two females everyone has a right to be married.
A year later, opposition to same-sex marriage for religious reasons has become the focal point of demands that the Texas Legislature act in response (Ura, 2015). “I do think that it is very important that we don’t lose sight of the fact that part of religious freedom is that citizens do have that inherent right to not have to do things that put them at odds with their religion,” said State Representative Cecil Bell Jr., R-Magnolia. State Senator Charles Perry, a Lubbock Republican who described the ruling
It provides an example of how certain rights should be exemplified, and it shows which rights are the most important and concerning. Today, this court case has inspired people to have the freedom to choose any marriage partner that they love. This translates over into the right for gay people to
The debate around same-sex marriage was is a good idea to legalize it. I believe that same-sex marriage should be legal. I don’t think there is anything wrong with people of the same sex getting married. Now the concept of traditional marriage has changed and the power of love is more important than gender in my opinion.
Marriage is a contract between two people and honestly I think that the society should not be interfering this bond. Not permitting the right to marry another human is a severe violation of the human rights and freedom. James Carville “I was against gay marriage until I realized that I didn’t have one.” The statement is self-explanatory: “You don’t get to judge because you don’t have the
To most ears, it probably sounds inoffensive. A little outdated and clinical, perhaps, but harmless enough: homosexual. But that five-syllable word has never been more loaded, more deliberately used and, to the ears of many gays and lesbians, more permissiveness. Homosexual’ is the ring of ‘colored’ now, in the way your grandmother might have used that term, except that it hasn’t been recover in the same way. Consider the following phrases: homosexual community, homosexual activist, homosexual marriage.
Homosexuality was once considered sacred in ancient Rome, albeit being treated poorly since the middle ages. Like this, homosexuality has been suppressed for a long time and thenceforth, the public opinion towards it has been on a downward road until recent years when LGBT groups started stepping up front and coming out along with the increasing controversy towards their rights. The subject of homosexuality has always been polemical. Every once in a while a news article would come up saying something like "Manny Pacquiao provokes storm by calling gay people ‘worse than animals’" or "Sam Smith Talks Coming Out As Gay".