Legalization of SameSex Marriage

The Battle of the Centuries

Brandon Johnston

The course of action that has been taken over the past several years regarding
same-sex couples and the legalization of their marriage.

Legalization 2

LEGALIZATION OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE: THE BATTLE OF THE CENTURIES

The United States was once founded as a free and equal country. The founders of the
United States set out from Great Britain so a new country could be founded that was based on
freedom, equality; and later, religion, speech, and assembly. This new country was welcome to
all where everyone would be treated the same no matter where they originate from, what you
practice, or what their beliefs are. People from all over the world set out to join this new
world, but soon this country met a harsh reality and the freedom and equality on which it was
based soon fell apart. No longer was everyone treated the same. Industries took over, power was
unequal, and America had some major rebuilding to do, which to this day, is still being
configured. This may sound like a history lesson; a bunch of boring, useless information not
pertaining to same-sex marriage at all, but in fact, it deals with how the legalization began.
The First Amendment grants the right of freedom, religion, and speech. Many supporters
of same-sex marriage argue that this amendment should grant the protection of the rights of
clergy and faith communities to perform their own marriage ceremonies (Masci , 2014). This
means that speech and religion should allow all communities located in the United States to
perform the acts they feel fit to allow the country to flourish on the equality it was built upon.
Also, to allow the right of clergy to offer sermons that opposes same-sex marriage was viewed as
unlawful (Masci, 2014). Even though homosexuals have all the right in the world to be irate; still
they agree that the heterosexuals should have the right to voice their opinions. Same-sex couples
are aware of discrimination with housing, employment, adoption, and other services, but those
who support gay marriages argue that once a state recognizes the marriage, the couples should

Legalization 3

not have to be subject to discrimination and should be treated just like any other married couple

(Masci, 2014). There is no reason that a couple who moves from one state, where gay marriage
is legal; to another state, where it is illegal, should be treated any differently or lose their
privileges as Americans or as heterosexuals.
It is claimed across nineteen states that same-sex marriage is recognized; however, thirtyone states still lack the recognition of these couples. Not only does this mean that these states do
not recognize them as a couple, but these individuals are missing out on thousands of dollars in
benefits from their spouses (Ellis, 2013). It is not fair that these couples should lose out on their
benefits simply because another state does not honor them as a married couple. Recently, sixty
year old Steven Rains spouse, Don Condit, passed away from cancer the past year (Ellis, 2013).
People would assume Rain would receive some of the benefits, but since he was forced out of his
house due to the high cost of living he had to move to Texas. This was a problem due to the fact
that Texas does not allow nor support same-sex marriage. Although the couple was together for
thirty years and Condit served in the military granting him compensation; Rain would receive
none of the money because he now residing in Texas (Ellis, 2013). Couples all over the country
are being affected by similar actions due to full faith and credit. The only chance Rain has of
receiving the compensation money from his husbands death is by the outcome of the ongoing
lawsuit (Ellis Page 1). Problems such as this are rising up all over the country and are being
worked through legal situations daily.
The Bill of Rights plays a large role in the fight to legalize the marriage of homosexuals.
The fourteenth amendment clearly states in Section 1 that

Legalization 4

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall
any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; nor deny to any person within jurisdiction the
equal protection of laws (Kellard, 2014).
Now this may seem confusing and not easy to understand, but in a simpler form flows perfectly
with the process of legalizing same-sex marriage nationally. The first line says, a state cannot
deny nor create a law that revokes one persons privilege that is without revoking it from
someone else. The law goes on to state that life, liberty, or property cannot be denied from you
because of what society views homosexuals as. A heterosexual cannot be delivered a right before
a homosexual just because someone feels the heterosexual is more deserving because they are

normal. The last line of the amendment states that based on religion, sexuality, even hair color
does not change the protection received from the government. No factor determines the right
because all Americans born or naturalized in the United States are granted this right. This
amendment can be used to argue the stature and unequal treatment between homosexuals and
heterosexuals.
Marriage is based on love and is an act between the love of two people. Neither
heterosexual nor homosexual orientation should be considered for their citizenship and civil
rights (Skillen, 2014). Just because a person is different than someone else does not mean that
you should be judged differently because of it. The relationship between two homosexuals is no
different than that of two heterosexuals besides the obvious same-sex partner. The United States

Legalization 5

allows for thousands of marriages to be denied each day because not everyone agrees they fit in
society. People now today are judged on their sexuality, but those who marry for the wrong
reasons are not judge. Some people marry for the greed of money, health insurance, and even a
non-sexual companionship, but nothing is said about them (Kellard, 2014). The government and
state officials turn the other cheek and look away and allow for them to happen. Even greater
than the number of marriages the government looks away from and let happen, is the amount of
divorces that come out of them! Currently, the United States alone has a divorce rate is over fifty
percent (Kellard, 2014). The same-sex couples of our country are being left in the dust, turned
away from and left without a right to marry the one they love and why; because the United States
and other nations are too afraid of change and what outcomes will come from it.
Most opponents of same-sex marriage would argue that it is wrong, but it should not be
allowed to be practiced and is disgusting. That is completely opinionated and could be viewed
whether you are gay, straight, bisexual, or a transvestite. No matter who you love, everyone is
equal and should not be treated any different from one another. Only a decade ago no one would

have ever expected this turn around. It was not until Hawaii challenged their right to be able to
allow same-sex marriage. Although they were declined on December 20, 1999, this act of
bravery would begin an act of courage throughout the United States as we know it (Historic,
2013). By standing up for something that not a single other person would, brought out a soon to
be new face of America.
It was on March 16, 2000, that the first of the fifty states legalized the union between
same-sex couples with a 76-69 vote (Historic, 2014). This may not seem like a big deal only

Legalization 6

having one state representing the union between anyone no matter their sexuality. Although there
was a period of a few years in which the controversy seemed to settle and fade away; quickly it
bounced back and blew up again. Between 2008 and 2009, five more states joined the fight;
including Iowa, Maine, New Hampshire, and Connecticut (Masci, 2014). All of these states did
not simply make a snap of their fingers; they simply passed the law. Court decisions and trials
were processed to make a deciding vote on whether or not these states should allow for a samesex partnership.
In more recent years, a total of thirty-two states are now joined in hand all fighting to
change the minds of the American people (Same-Sex, 2013). Some may argue that there are still
eighteen other states who have yet to join in the matter, during the past fourteen years the
mindset of this country has completely changed as a whole. Yes, there are religious activists and
many others who are opposed to the idea, but in this day and age it is a requirement of life to
have an open mind about the ever changing world.
As each and every day passes, the world becomes a little bigger, a little more diverse, and
a lot more hypocritical and demanding. Everyone wants to have complete and utter control over
every aspect of their life and society, but simply this is an impossible task. In this new world
there is only two possible outcomes for life; accept it and move on, or hold on to everything you
dislike and let it drag you down.

Legalization 7

Work Cited
A Contentious Debate: Same-Sex Marriage in the U.S. (n.d.). Retrieved November 20, 2014,
from http://www.pewforum.org/2009/07/09/a-contentious-debate-same-sex-marriage-inthe-us/
Defining Marriage: State Defense of Marriage Laws and Same-Sex Marriage. (n.d.). Retrieved
November 20, 2014, from http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/same-sexmarriage-overview.aspx
HOMOSEXUAL (SAME-SEX) MARRIAGES - All sides to the issue. (2010, May 10).
Retrieved September 18, 2014, from http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm
Kellard, James. "Gay Marriage Should Be Legal." Gay Marriage. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from "Do We Have a Constitutional Right to Ban
Gay Marriage?" 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 20 Sept. 2014.
Lupo, I., Elwood, F., Davis, E., Tuttle, R. W., R, D., & Berz, S. (2009, May 21). A Clash of
Rights? Gay Marriage and the Free Exercise of Religion [Interview by D. Masci]. In The
Pew Forum On Religion and Public Life. Retrieved September 19, 2014, from
http://pewforum.org/Gay-Marriage-and-Homosexuality/A-Clash-of-Rights-GayMarriage-and-the-Free-Exercise-of-Religion.aspx
Masci, D. (2009, July 09). A Contentious Debate: Same-Sex Marriage in the U.S. Retrieved
September 20, 2014, from http://pewforum.org/Gay-Marriage-and-Homosexuality/AContentious-Debate-Same-Sex-Marriage-in-the-US.aspx
Powers, Kirsten. "Christianity's new look on gays." National Catholic Reporter 4 July 2014:
25. Student Resources in Context. Web. 20 Sept. 2014.
Same Sex Marriage. (2010, April). Retrieved September 20, 2014, from
http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16430
"Same-sex military spouses sue for equal benefits." CNN Wire 11 Sept. 2014. Student
Resources in Context. Web. 20 Sept. 2014.
Skillen, J. W. (2003, October 20). Marriage and Homosexual Rights. Retrieved September 18,
2014.
"Vermont Becomes the First State to Legalize Civil Unions Between Partners of the Same Sex,
March 16, 2000." Historic U.S. Events. Detroit: Gale, 2004. Student Resources in
Context. Web. 20 Sept. 2014.

Legalization 8

Walen, Alec. "Society Should Allow Same-Sex Marriage." Homosexuality. Ed. Helen Cothran.
San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "The Defense of
Marriage Act and Authoritarian Morality." Dissent (Summer 1997). Opposing Viewpoints
in Context. Web. 19 Sept. 2014.