Marriage Equality

Marriage Equality
Constructing social problems begins with making claims about any perceived condition. These claims are the first component of the social problems process. When a claim is made that a condition should be recognized as a social problem, the claimsmakers must bring attention to the topic and convince others that it should be recognized as troubling and that something needs to be done about it (Best, 2013). One reoccurring frame is on the topic of marriage equality, which is typically either strongly supported or strongly opposed. Supporters of same-sex marriage claim, regardless of sexual orientation, we are all citizens under the government and all are deserving of equal rights to the benefits that couples receive through marriage. Those opposing same-sex marriage commonly make claims that its legalization would be detrimental to society, the institution of marriage, and what it stands for.
Often claims utilize a variety of rhetorical devices in order to persuade people and elicit emotional reactions. They often establish their grounds by following a “rhetorical recipe” that contains typifying examples, naming the problem, and statistics. This combination of rhetoric is used to capture the audience’s attention and leave an impression in hopes that they will support their claims (Best, 2013). Marriage equality advocates claim that disallowing homosexuals to marry is unfair and unjust. The claim’s grounds argue that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, should be treated equally and given the same rights as heterosexual individuals. They feel that it is a same-sex couple’s right to have the opportunity to a legally recognized marriage and its benefits, just as straight couples do, and is unconstitutional to disallow it. “If it is illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation, why are we discriminating based on sexual orientation?” (Phillips, Shuham, &Thompson, 2012). The government is not responsible to dictate the sexual lives of its citizens, especially when it promotes religious traditions. Rather, it is responsible for providing the citizens equal protection for their lives and liberties. One supporter states, “If ‘traditional’ marriage is the only barrier between gay couples and constitutional equality under the law, then it is ‘traditional’ marriage, not gay marriage, that is incompatible with the Constitution and what it stands for” (Phillips, Shuham, &Thompson, 2012). Advocates are constantly fighting to legalize gay marriage in all states to ensure equality regardless to an individual’s sexual orientation.
Those who oppose marriage equality most often seem to claim that it would impose acceptance onto all of society, devalue traditional marriage and degrade the institution of the family. A major reason they use to explain this is religion; that homosexuality is a sin and that anyone who believes in God would be against it (SITE). They warrant that the institution of marriage exists for a man and a woman to reproduce. That marriage is not just a celebration of love; it is specifically between a man, a woman, and the children of their union (Ahmann, 2012 and Phillips, Shuham, &Thompson, 2012). They claim that divorce rates will increase if gay marriage is legalized because marriage will be divorced from its fundamental meaning (Ahmann, 2012). Opponents conclude that same-sex marriage should not be allowed between two individuals of the same sex in order to preserve the sanctity of marriage and it should be written into the constitution that marriage is between only a man and a woman.
Supporters and opponents of marriage equality would have different target audiences and the claimsmakers tailor their claims to fit their audience’s concerns. For example, the opposing side may shape their claims to the concerns of a religious and typically more conservative audience. Rhetoric is used to attempt to elicit emotional reactions so people share their concerns and ideas. The feedback from the public is assessed and results in claims being reconstructed. At every stage of the process, claims will be reconstructed, reinterpreted, and modified to reshape them into what the public will appeal to by claimsmakers and the media (Best, 2013).
They continue to deliver petitions, launch campaigns, inform and educate society, outreach programs, projects, advocacy, and all other means to spread awareness and fight for the rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community. The media is heavily involved in marriage equality as it has been a popularly debated condition, primarily since the Stonewall Riots in New York in 1969. I do feel the media has moderate success in gaining the public’s attention. For example, in the most recent presidential election the media publicized the candidates’ positions on same-sex marriage and rights equality. For constituents who are in favor of equality, their votes may have been swayed based on how the media represented each presidential candidate’s stance. The media also plays a large part in informing the public as to which policies, petitions, and laws are passed or denied regarding the legalization of gay marriage. Experts play a role in the construction of marriage equality as a social problem by supporting or criticizing each side’s claims. There are many experts involved in the fight for marriage equality including professors, researchers, and scientists. Experts are used as rhetoric in the social problems process. They use their “expert opinion” to make their claim appear rational, informational, reputable, and valid. Experts in the same-sex marriage dispute can come from many different fields. Researchers and professors can have experience in science and genetics to support the argument that homosexuality is innate and a biological occurrence. Experts can also come from fields such as psychology, sociology, and religious studies—just to name a few.
Public opinion has been measured by polls throughout the years that same-sex marriage has been debated. The Pew Forum of Public Life states that, “In 2001, Americans opposed same-sex marriage by a 57% to 35% margin. Today, there is slightly more support for same-sex marriage than opposition to it, with 48% in favor and 43% opposed.” More and more states are introducing ballots that could allow homosexuals the opportunity to marry. November 6th, 2012 three more states—Washington, Maryland, and Maine—voted to legalize gay marriage; bringing the total to nine states and Washington D.C. Additionally, 17 states total provide some level of relationship acknowledgement for same-sex couples. In just 2000, zero states recognized them in any way. However, The Federal Defense of Marriage Act denies legally married same-sex couples from more than 1,100 federal benefits and obligations (HRC). The HRC is making effort to win a successful committee vote on the Respect for Marriage Act, which would restore the rights of all lawfully married couples to receive the benefits of marriage under federal law.

Reference List

Ahmann, A. (2012, November 4) Consider Harm to Society by Gay Marriage. Union-Bulletin. Retrieved from http://union-bulletin.com/news/2012/nov/03/consider-harm-society- gay-marriage/

Best, J. (2013). Social Problems. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Pew Research Center. (Nov 2012). Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage. Retrieved from http://features.pewforum.org/same-sex-marriage-attitudes/ Phillips, H., Shuham, M., & Thompson, S. (2012, February 22). Equality is More Than Rhetoric. The Harvard Crimson. Retrieved from http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/2/22/ Equality-Marriage-Rhetoric/