Brandon Woody English 3604-201 Dr. Reginald Martin 7/9/2015 Uproar Over Marriage Equality June 26th, 2015 was a monumental day for the LGBT community due to the Supreme Court of the United States deciding that preventing gay couples from getting married was unconstitutional, consequently legalizing same sex marriage in all 50 states. The response to the SCOTUS?s decision has been mixed, with supporters expressing elation to detractors displaying disappointment and anger in response to the ruling. Although I wouldn?t describe myself to be elated when news of the legalization of gay marriage was revealed, I am in support of the decision the Supreme Court handed down. I consider myself a supporter of the Supreme Court?s decision for the following reasons: the United States has long been a global leader on social issues; legislation in the modern era shouldn?t be based upon the rules included in archaic religious texts, and there are far greater issues that deserve the …show more content…
The United States of America has been the global leader in regard to pushing progressive social agendas, often being a proverbial beacon of light leading other countries out of the darkness of close-minded oppressive social ideologies. From the Civil Rights Movement to the Women?s Liberation Movement, the U.S. has long been a country that pushes past discriminatory ideas in order bring about the reality of a more inclusive society many Americans hope for. With the Supreme Court?s June 26th decision, Americans who have longed to live in a country that embraced utopian ideals were ecstatic to realize that their country was taking steps to bring those dreams to life. The progressive strides made that day weren?t embraced by everyone throughout the land,
Karina Dyal PHIL 340: Ethics and Law Legal Brief Assignment—Lawrence v. Texas 04/01/17 Case: Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) Facts: Oral and anal sex between two individuals from the same gender was deemed illegal—implemented through a Georgia statute. Hardwick who was an adult male, was charged in 1982 for violating the statute by engaging in sexual activities with another male in his home. The case was not pursued by the District Attorney, who also decided to not have the case presented before a grand jury. Hardwick went to the federal district court where he questioned the statute’s constitutionality. Issue: Does the U.S. Constitution give homosexual individuals the fundamental right to have sexual intercourse, and therefore renders the laws
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 .
The Lawrence v. Texas ruling paved the way for equal treatment for gays and lesbians and brought them under the umbrella of the society by acknowledging their sexual preferences. 2. For the purpose of the paper we have chosen two American states - Florida and
The Supreme Court granted a certiorari to answer the question if the rulings for other cases against homosexual’s equality had gone against the fourteenth amendment, if Bowers vs Hardwick should be overturned, and if homosexuals should have privacy in their own
When the court examined America’s history, they concluded that American antisodomy laws have not been enforced and did not single out homosexual couples until the 20th century. The court
But, as with its Commerce Clause jurisprudence, the Court’s expansive rights jurisprudence may not be taken for granted. Consider the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges case, which legalized same-sex marriage in all states. That decision, undeniably, was an audacious assertion of power by the Supreme Court, one that brought the guillotine down on states’ internal deliberations as to the merits of same-sex marriage. I thus cannot deny that this decision counts in favor of the view that the Court holds a bias toward centralization, but there is another side to this coin, namely, the four impassioned dissenting opinions delivered by the Court. The principal dissent among these decried the Court for “invalidat[ing] the marriage laws of more than half the States” without their assent.
To elaborate, on June 26, 2015, the US supreme court made gay marriage legal in all 50 states. As a state that is strongly fixed on both individualistic and more specifically, traditionalistic values, the platform of these political cultures in Texas were challenged through means of media. A culture that is based on traditional values strives away from changes and is resistant to accepting new laws, such as the legalization of same sex marriage. However, pop culture and widespread media shared amongst the citizens of the state of Texas, opened and shaped the debate over this issue. In fact, “scholars agree that the news media have become more attentive to and supportive of lesbian and gay rights over time.”
Many different groups in the United States have fought for their equal rights through civil rights battles. Each one inspiring the next, slowly transforming America into the country it is today. Some of these battles have come a long way, since the beginning of history for a lot, some of which are still in the mist of being fought, some of which made huge improvements yet still haven’t reached full equality. Through the many steps taken in marches, and blood and tears shed though the riots, all these battles though has change the way Americans see one another and their country. Going for the common goal of equality, these civil rights movements have changed America for the greater good.
When debating the legalization of same sex marriage, religious reasoning and accusations of bigotry often provoke obstinance. Instead of reiterating those arguments, William J. Bennett, a prominent cultural conservative, former secretary of education, and author of The Book of Virtues, focuses on societal effects in his op-ed article, “Against Gay Marriage.” Though Bennett’s piece conveys partiality, it also attempts to discuss this issue scrupulously to ensure readers will consider his argument and perhaps accept his implications. While some of Bennett’s word choices convey tolerance of the gay community, his rhetoric incites readers to accept that preserving society requires marginalizing homosexuals.
Pride and Prejudice is a 19th century novel written by Jane Austen. In this novel, satire is the main tool used to convey Austen’s views on society, and what is flawed about it. The novel uses that satire to convey points about how certain things in society should be changed, or gotten rid of, especially with marriage. Austen satirizes typical marriage tropes present circa 1800 by exposing the issues that come with marriage based on wealth, happiness, and exclusive benefit. Social class was a large factor in many things in the 19th century.
So what has this taught America? America has learned that the fight for equality and against discrimination is ongoing. Additionally, the movements fight for equality has become the basis for other progressive movements. Immigration reformation, for example, exudes a myriad of similarities to the protests and legal actions of the 50’s and 60’s.
In 2015, the Obergefell v. Hodges case ended the “state bans on same-sex marriage”, therefore legalizing same-sex marriage (Important Supreme Court Cases). Now, “same-sex couples can now receive the benefits...of marriage that were largely exclusive to heterosexual couples” (Koch). The ruling has led to the modern fight for gay civil rights. Exposure to the LGBTQ+ community, the southern “Bathroom Bills”, and other fights for transgender rights, and the press for more LGBTQ+ representation in the media has erupted from this case. Both rulings had very big impacts on their respective communities.
People want to get married because they are ready to take the relationship to a higher level of responsibility and commitment. The satirical argument made throughout the video is that one’s freedom is being compromised and ties, especially with the family are ruined once marriage gets in the picture. The video satirically highlights how individuals will not want to marry because of the huge commitments and responsibilities involved. This is ironic because, when it is decided that the goal of a relationship is marriage, it shows that the couple is ready to commit and love each other unconditionally.
How would you feel if u werent treated the same? Well according to Huffington Post a gay couple named Ben Valencia and Luis marmolejo were trying to get a cake made but were rejected. Ben had said he felt “dehumanized” after he got turned away for wanting a cake for their wedding. This was a recent story that had just happened this year and it shows that people are still discriminating, but people need to understand that discriminating isn’t
- Gay Marriage - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., 15 Oct. 2007. Web. 18 May 2016.