Same Gender Marriage

Same-Gender Marriage
In recent years, the issue of same-gender marriage has come to the front position. The California Supreme Court ruled that prohibiting same-gender marriage violates the state constitution and same-gender couples can now marry in the state. However, Proposition 8 has overturned that ruling. A middle ground of sorts has been adopted in some states called “civil unions”, which essentially stops short of being completely married, but gives many of the civil benefits of marriage. Same-gender marriages will not hinder children in their up-bringing, but only nurture and provide the proper care as any parent would. Same-gender marriages should be recognized in state because there is a separation between church and state and all men and women are created equal.
Opponents of same-gender marriage argue that Proposition 8 was overturned because most Americans thought “though homosexuals may believe that they are merely seeking a small expansion of the definition of marriage, the majority of Americans perceive this change as a radical deconstruction of the institution” (Schiffren 192). They argue that with the legalization of same-gender marriage it will destroy the institution of marriage. It is believed that by recognizing civil unions among those who are gay is “a radical redefinition of society’s most fundamental institution” (Schiffren 192). They believe that by recognizing same-gender marriage as a civil union it will require reconstructing the definition of marriage. Proposition 8 prevents same-gender marriages to be recognized in state which prevents gay couples from earning the full benefits that would be earned in a civil union.
However, legalization of same-gender marriage will not destroy the institution of marriage. The definition of marriage has been modified throughout history. For centuries, “marriage was by definition a contract in which the wife was her husband’s legal property then later the definition was modified to where marriage should be between two people of the same race” (Sullivan 194). These modifications in the definition of marriage had changed because it was recognized that human dignity was the same among diverse men and women. Gay couples merely seek “to be a full and equal part of America, to give back to our society without being forced to lie or hide or live as second-class citizens” (Sullivan 194). Proposition 8 should have not been overturned because gay men and women no longer want to be strangers in America; they only seek for equality.
In addition, same-gender couples seek for the full benefits of a civil union, which "the Government gives tax benefits, inheritance rights and employee benefits only to the married" (Schiffren 193). Proposition 8 prevents gay couples to earn the same benefits as a heterosexual couple would. Recently, a lot of federal support has been given to insurance companies. State laws enable these insurance companies to be prejudice when issuing claims to homosexual couples. These claims are issued because gay couples that live together cannot earn the same benefits as a heterosexual couple. When the federal government is not recognizing a civil union in a state like Iowa, where same-gender marriage is legal, the federal government is then denying the benefits that are rightfully earned by tax paying homosexual couples.
Opponents of same-gender marriage argue "The legal union of same-sex couples would shatter the conventional definition of marriage, change the rules which govern behavior, endorse practices which are completely antithetical to the tenets of all of the world 's major religions, send conflicting signals about marriage and sexuality, particularly to the young, and obscure marriages enormously consequential function-procreation and child-rearing" (Bennett 196). They argue that with the legalization of same-gender marriage there will be confusion among children. They believe that this confusion would question the definition of marriage and their sexuality. Many American’s believe that legalizing same-gender marriage violates the bibles teachings, which upsets the people with different religious views. Opponents also argue that the initial reason couples go out and get married is to procreate. It is believed that if gay couples cannot pro create then gay couples should not be recognized as a civil union.
However, same-gender couples argue that same-gender marriage “contradicts the essential purpose of the institution, which is procreation; but the state does not ask prospective mixed-gender spouses if they intend to have children, and the law grants a childless married couple the same rights and benefits as their most prolific married neighbors” (Johnson 202). Gay couples seek for the same benefits as a heterosexual couple would have received. Same-gender couples argue that by recognizing heterosexual civil unions, the law grants heterosexual couples with no children those same benefits. This is unfair for the homosexual couples. Religious advocates believe it is immoral for same-gender marriages to be recognized as civil unions because it violates the teachings of the bible. No ones views of religion should influence the legalization of same-gender marriage. Same-gender marriage will not hinder children’s upbringings. I have a friend her name is Ava and she has two moms. Both of her parents provide the necessities to raise a young woman. Ava’s parents always explained and taught the difference between couples like them and other heterosexual couples. Ava has never been confused about her sexuality. If anything both of Ava’s moms educated her about the harsh realities and the struggle they have to surpass each day. Ava is a strong heterosexual woman who knows what she wants and has independently grown. Ava turned out to be a great woman and friend because she had two strong women to lead as examples.
Proposition 8 is wrong in its ruling to deny the legalization of same-gender marriages. With the legalization of same-gender marriage we then can rightfully say American citizens are treated equally. If proposition 8 did not overturn in the Supreme Courts ruling then gay couples would rightfully earn the benefits as heterosexual couples do. If same-gender marriage were to be legalized, couples then can gain the benefits given from the government to raise children. This prevents good role models, who just so happen to be gay, to raise children using the government benefits given to heterosexual couples. Religion should have no say on whether or not marriage should be legalized because their religious views should not be implemented to the definition of marriage.

Works Cited
Bennett, William J. "An Honorable Estate." Joseph, Sam. Current
Arguments. Mason:Thomson, 2006. 196-197.
Johnson, Fenton. "Wedded to an Illusion." Joseph, Sam. Current
Arguments. Mason: Thomson, 2006. 198-208.
Schiffren, Lisa. "Gay Marriage." Joseph, Sam. Current Arguments.
Mason: Thomson, 2006. 191-193.
Sullivan, Andrew. "Simple Equality." Joseph, Sam. Current
Arguments. Mason: Thomson, 2006. 194-195.

Cited: Bennett, William J. "An Honorable Estate." Joseph, Sam. Current Arguments. Mason:Thomson, 2006. 196-197. Johnson, Fenton. "Wedded to an Illusion." Joseph, Sam. Current Arguments. Mason: Thomson, 2006. 198-208. Schiffren, Lisa. "Gay Marriage." Joseph, Sam. Current Arguments. Mason: Thomson, 2006. 191-193. Sullivan, Andrew. "Simple Equality." Joseph, Sam. Current Arguments. Mason: Thomson, 2006. 194-195.