Friday, 2 March 2012

Gay marriage legalization

Traditionally in the contemporary society, a relationship between a male and female was seen as both religious and legal way of relating (Mello 17). On the other hand, Homosexual relationships have always been at the receiving end of criticism and individuals who engaged in it were lambasted. Critics argue that a gay marriage is a social evil that ought to be condemned at all levels. However, the society is slowly finding gay relationships acceptable. In this essay, I am looking keenly at the evolution of gay marriages and the shaping of its legalization through public opinion.

Gay marriage is a love commitment between individuals of the same sex i.e. in this case, a man and a man (Mello 97). Most countries are skeptical about the legalization of gay marriage. In the United States of America, these relationships are illegal. However, individual states have the freedom to legalize these marriages. The United States constitution advances that states are mandated to recognize the laws of other states. This implies that, given the acceptance of gay marriage in a state and the couples move to a different state, the other state is under obligation to accept and recognize the marriage (Craig and Clyde 165). From the aforementioned, the legalization of gay marriage in a state legitimizes the marriage in an entire country.

Civil society and other movements who were is support of gay rights and marriages went public in the 1970s. However, 21st century marked the climax of gay marriages crusades. During the first decade of 21st century, public opinion was in favor of legalization of these marriages. However, policy makers were not keen to make readjustments to factor in the opinions of the majority (Craig and Clyde 267). The federal law for example fails to give a definition of marriage. In addition, despite the same law postulating that gay marriages are illegal, it has a provision that the country is obliged to recognize any marriage accepted by individual states.

The rights of gay individuals have always been jeopardized by ungrounded believes and arguments. Before rubbishing the fears of the opponents of the legalizations on these marriages, it is important to analyze their assertions before refuting their arguments as baseless. Of importance to note is that most opponents base their arguments in moral grounds other than the constitution. This is evident in their assertion that gay marriages are in violation of religious freedoms. However, demonizing gay marriage as sin does not remove individual rights off the constitution. The constitution in defends of individual rights asserts that every view or lack of it ought to be accorded much respect by parties (Craig and Clyde 153). Government is mandated to formulate legislation on behalf of all its citizens and allowing being arm twisted on religious grounding is unacceptable.

In my opinion, gay marriages need to be legalized and spouses allowed to enjoy all benefits that comes with it. Gay marriages is a lifestyle which is gaining popularity in the modern society and curtailing some privileges i.e. critical medical decisions is being insensitive to the plight of the civil couples. In addition, formulating laws to guide the establishments of gay institutions is being sensitive to the plight of minority in the society. In most countries, constitutions are devised in a manner that empowers the majority, however in light of democracy and to avoid discrimination of a mild grouping, protection of minority rights is important. In accordance to the discussion, I advocate for the legalization of gay marriages, as it poses no harm to either the society or individuals.


Works Cited

Craig, Rimmerman and Clyde Wilcox. The politics of same-sex marriage. Sassen, Saskia: University of Chicago Press, 2007.

Mello, Michael. Legalizing gay marriage. New York, NY: Temple University Press, 2004.

No comments:

Post a Comment