Cratina Coody-Bjorkland

Gay Marriage

Cratina Coody-Bjorkland

PHI200: Mind and Machine

Professor Kelly Mink

December 19, 2011

Gay Marriage

Introduction

Gay marriage - the legalized version of a union between two people who are of the same sex - has in recent years become a much disputed issue in the US. As is the case with many controversial issues, there are people who vehemently support it, and there are people who (with an equal degree of vehemence, or greater) argue against its implementation. At this time, same-sex marriages are recognized in Massachusetts (the state that first granted marriage license to same-sex couples) and several other states.[1]

Basic Dispute

California was, after Massachusetts (as mentioned above), the second state to legalize gay marriage in the US. But that was until a Supreme Court of California ruling in 2008 that made an amendment to the California Constitution, thus effectively limiting marriage to man and woman only. The fair question to ask is: why must marriage be exclusive to only heterosexual couples (leading to the implication that there can be no acknowledged relationship between two partners who are of the same sex)?

Gay marriage has always been a bone of contention between people of different mentalities. Many people argue that marriage is a sacrosanct - that it can only be between one man and one woman and no other (and when this line of the conversation comes up, some people also like to cite religious issues: that in the Bible is written that marriage is the holy coupling of a man and a woman). They also argue that gay and lesbian couples do not marry for the same purpose as heterosexual couples do - for love and commitment - but for rights and benefits,[2] which tarnishes the real meaning of love and marriage.

Side #1 of the Debate

(Source: Snyder, Claire. 2006. Gay Marriage and Democracy: Equality for All.Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.)

Some people argue (as Claire Snyder did in her book Gay Marriage and Democracy: Equality for All) that the fundamental principles of American democracy means that same-sex marriage has to be legalized.

American democracy is all about the promotion of equality among all of its citizens. If marriage is a given for couples comprised of a man and a woman, then, in a similar vein, it should also be the same case for couples that deviate from the so-called traditional man-woman coupling. It does not matter if they are couplings of a man and another man, or a woman and another woman, or several other variations that are derived from different sexual identities. If one person wants to get married with another person to show their love and commitment, democracy should guarantee that they have the right to do so.

With regards to this, there are also people who argue that a same-sex couple does not have to be married to show their love and commitment. But why should they not be allowed to reap the benefits of an institution that is allowed the traditional man-woman couple? For what, exactly, is tradition but something that was passed down from before? Everything that is tradition these days was a revolutionary idea at some point in the past.

Side #2 of the Debate

(Source: Gordon, C Ann, Tadloc, Barry L, and Popp, Elizabeth. September 2 - September 5, 2004. Framing the Issue of Same-Sex Marriage: Traditional Values versus Equal Rights. 2004 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.)

Those who oppose same-sex marriage argue that same-sex marriages go against traditional values. Organized religions, for example, like the Roman Catholic Church place much emphasis on traditions.

Church organizations believe a same-sex marriage threatens the traditional family structure as well as the traditionally held morals of the general public. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, has often been cited in its belief that a homosexual defies the natural moral law in a rejection of the holiness of traditional one man and one woman marriages. Even in the olden days, gay people (then known as sodomites) were condemned by the church; if caught in an act of sodomy, they would either be executed or forever exiled.

In Framing the Issue of Same-Sex Marriage: Traditional Values versus Equal Rights, the authors say that, if same-sex marriages are legalized, they would “destroy marriage as a functioning social entity in America.”

[1]

The five other states that grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples are Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont. Maryland acknowledges same-sex marriages, but does not grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

[2]

This is actually a reflection of a number of people’s thoughts on this issue. A poll that was done by Third Way and Grove Insight found that respondents are split between ‘love and commitment’ and ‘rights and benefits’ when they are asked why they think same-sex couples might want to get married. For more information, please see: Aamer, M., & USA, T. (November 7, 2011). Reframing the gay-marriage question. USA Today, pg. 07a.