Voters eleven stat voted to ban same-sex marriage on Electn Day. Margaret Warner leads a bate on the gay marriage issue wh Shannon Royce, executive director of the Marriage Amendment Project and Matt Foreman, executive director of the Natnal Gay and Lbian Task Force.
Contents:
- SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?
- WHY THE BATTLE FOR GAY MARRIAGE WAS WON SO EASILY
- EXPERTS DISCS THE ONGOG DEBATE OVER GAY MARRIAGE
- WE TOLD OUR WEDDG GUTS ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE EQUALY. WE THOUGHT WAS THE PAST.
- GAY MARRIAGE DEBATE
- IS THE GAY MARRIAGE DEBATE OVER?
- 5 QUTNS ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT AND GAY MARRIAGE IN THE U.S.
SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?
Proponents ntend that gay marriage bans are discrimatory and unnstutnal, opponents ague that marriage is primarily for procreatn. * debate over gay marriage *
On July 25, 2014 Miami-Da County Circu Court Judge Sarah Zabel led Florida’s gay marriage ban unnstutnal and stated that the ban “serv only to hurt, to discrimate, to prive same-sex upl and their fai of equal digny, to label and treat them as send-class cizens, and to em them unworthy of participatn one of the fundamental stutns of our society. The Amerin Psychologil Associatn, Amerin Psychiatric Associatn, and others nclud that legal gay marriage giv upl “accs to the social support that already facilat and strengthens heterosexual marriag, wh all of the psychologil and physil health benefs associated wh that support. A 2010 analysis found that after their stat had banned gay marriage, gay, lbian and bisexual people suffered a 37% crease mood disorrs, a 42% crease alhol-e disorrs, and a 248% crease generalized anxiety disorrs.
In 2012, the Williams Instute at the Universy of California at Los Angel (UCLA) found that the first five years after Massachetts legalized gay marriage 2004, same-sex weddg expendur (such as venue rental, weddg k, etc.
WHY THE BATTLE FOR GAY MARRIAGE WAS WON SO EASILY
The ntroversy igned by the Massachetts High Court lg allowg gay and lbian upl to marry ntu to rage state urts and legislatur as well as church across the natn. * debate over gay marriage *
2016 printial ndidate and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fra stated that civil unns are aquate as an equivalent to marriage: “Benefs are beg btowed to gay upl [ civil unns]… I believe we need to rpect those who believe that the word marriage has a spirual foundatn… Why n’t we rpect and tolerate that while at the same time sayg ernment nnot btow benefs unequally. Court papers filed July 2014 by attorneys fendg Arizona’s gay marriage ban stated that “the State regulat marriage for the primary purpose of channelg potentially procreative sexual relatnships to endurg unns for the sake of jog children to both their mother and their father… Same-sex upl n never provi a child wh both her blogil mother and her blogil father.
Lee Badgett, PhD, Director of the Center for Public Policy and Admistratn at the Universy of Massachetts at Amherst, stated that for many gay activists “marriage means adoptg heterosexual forms of fay and givg up distctively gay fay forms and perhaps even gay and lbian culture. Pla Ettelbrick, JD, Profsor of Law and Women’s Studi, wrote 1989, “Marriage ns ntrary to two of the primary goals of the lbian and gay movement: the affirmatn of gay inty and culture and the validatn of many forms of relatnships.
LGBT activist llective Agast Equaly stated, “Gay marriage ap hetero privilege… [and] creas enomic equaly by perpetuatg a system which ems married begs more worthy of the basics like health re and enomic rights. Queer activist Anrs Zanichkowsky stated June 2013 that the then mpaign for gay marriage “tentnally and malicly eras and exclus so many queer people and cultur, particularly trans and genr non-nformg people, poor queer people, and queer people non-tradnal fai… marriage thks non-married people are viant and not tly servg of civil rights.
EXPERTS DISCS THE ONGOG DEBATE OVER GAY MARRIAGE
Public Opn on Same-Sex Marriage Slishow: Changg Attus on Gay Marriage Overview of Same-Sex Marriage the U.S. Gay Marriage and the Law * debate over gay marriage *
In Islamic tradn, several hadhs (passag attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) nmn gay and lbian relatnships, cludg the saygs “When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shak, ” and “Sihaq [lbian sex] of women is za [illegimate sexual terurse].
Matt Barber, Associate Dean for Onle Programs at Liberty Universy School of Law, stated, “Every dividual engaged the homosexual liftyle, who has adopted a homosexual inty, they know, tuively, that what they’re dog is immoral, unnatural, and self-stctive, yet they thirst for that affirmatn. A 2003 set of guil signed by Pope John Pl II stated: “There are absolutely no grounds for nsirg homosexual unns to be any way siar or even remotely analogo to God’s plan for marriage and fay… Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go agast the natural moral law. On May 17, 2004, the first legal gay marriage the Uned Stat was performed Cambridge, MA between Tanya McCloskey, a massage therapist, and Marcia Kadish, an employment manager at an engeerg firm.
What if the fg gay rights mand of the past generatn had not been equal marriage rights but an affirmative-actn program for employment areas — say, the feral ernment — where gay men and lbians had suffered historic discrimatn? Even as nservativ fight for relig-liberty exemptns om the new norms around same-sex marriage, such as those the Supreme Court is nsirg a challenge om a Catholic social-servic agency that ref to place foster children gay fai, they’ve effectively nced feat the broar war over the earlier civil rights projects to which the qut for marriage equaly was often pared — notably, for women’s sufage and racial segregatn — not only took much longer to reach their goals but also appeared to leave a ridue of unrolved nflict even after the nstutnal issu were settled.
WE TOLD OUR WEDDG GUTS ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE EQUALY. WE THOUGHT WAS THE PAST.
* debate over gay marriage *
In the sprg of 1996, Whe Hoe talkg pots on the topic — which Print Bill Clton personally approved — argued that the print “do not believe is appropriate for srce feral rourc to be voted to providg spoal benefs to partners gay and lbian relatnships.
In pretrial statements, the state attorney general’s office dned a range of potential ratnal: that Hawaii thori had an tert ensurg that the state’s legal relatnships were regnized other jurisdictns; that the state had an tert furtherg procreatn wh marriage; that heterosexual marriag were better for children; that the islands’ tourist enomy uld suffer if Hawaii beme Lake Tahoe for gay and lbian none of the ratnal managed to persua judg — eher Hawaii or subsequent succsful challeng to marriage laws Vermont, Massachetts, Connecticut, California and Iowa.
GAY MARRIAGE DEBATE
” But afterward, even the most cynil observers of events Massachetts and the stat that followed s lead uld not pot to any societal y that gay marriage both the legal and polil spher, opponents were forced to shrk the circle of those expected to feel direct harm om lettg gay men and lbians marry. Even if simple exposure to gay fai ed harm to children (and gay-marriage opponents uld never mter anythg beyond njecture to support that claim), they did not brg much to the fight agast same-sex marriage as voters, donors or the same time, the aln of those vted legalizg same-sex marriage not only broaned, but their vtment the oute epened. This clud not jt gay upl who wanted to marry — drawn to the unique material benefs and symbolic power the stutn offered — but their fai and muni who saw marriage as a source of stabily, and even employers who wanted to synchronize their benefs wh the law and standardize them across state l.
IS THE GAY MARRIAGE DEBATE OVER?
Bakke, which upheld affirmative-actn was an accint of history, talyzed by lol events Hawaii, that marriage equaly rose to the top of the gay rights agenda at the start of this century.
5 QUTNS ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT AND GAY MARRIAGE IN THE U.S.
Supporters of same-sex marriage ntend that gay and lbian upl should be treated no differently than their heterosexual unterparts and that they should be able to marry like anyone else. They pot out, for stance, that homosexual upl who have been together for years often fd themselv whout the basic rights and privileg that are currently enjoyed by heterosexual upl who legally marry — om the sharg of health and pensn benefs to hospal visatn rights. Allowg gay and lbian upl to wed, they argue, will radilly refe marriage and further weaken at a time when the stutn is already ep trouble due to high divorce rat and the signifint number of out-of-wedlock births.
The Catholic Church and evangelil Christian groups have played a leadg role public opposn to gay marriage, while male Prottant church and other relig groups wrtle wh whether to orda gay clergy and perform same-sex marriage ceremoni. Ined, the ordatn and marriage of gay persons has been a growg wedge between the socially liberal and nservative wgs of the Epispal and Prbyterian church, leadg some nservative ngregatns and even whole dc to break away om their natnal church. However, a 2006 Pew survey found that sizable majori of whe male Prottants (66%), Catholics (63%) and those whout a relig affiliatn (78%) favor allowg homosexual upl to enter to civil unns that grant most of the legal rights of marriage whout the tle.