Search

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Analysis Post on Gay Marriage

            Though a relatively new debate in the national political realm, the issue of legalizing same-sex marriage across the United States has exploded into the public conscience over the past two decades.  Before the 2000’s, same-sex marriage was banned universally across the country.  America is still far behind other parts of the world in terms of this social movement.  Western Europe launched an early start in equalizing the status of gay couples.  Denmark allowed civil unions between gay couples in 1989, which granted them equal rights with married couples under Danish law.  The Netherlands became the first state to fully recognize same-sex marriages on April 1, 2001.  After the legalization in the Netherlands, many other countries in Western Europe and some in other parts of the world began to legalize gay marriage. 

The United States, however, though a world leader, has yet to nationally declare same-sex marriage legal.  The issue first came into national attention when a court case rocked Hawaii in 1993 over the issue of defining marriage.  A reactionary conservative response created the first “defense of marriage” in 1996, which then spread like wild fire across the United States—other states did not wish to have to deal with the questioning of their constitutions.   The debate crystallized for a few years until 2003, when a state finally recognized same-sex marriage. Massachusetts became the first to recognize gay marriage, deciding in Goodridge vs. Mass that excluding rights from a single group, such as the gay community, was unconstitutional.  The Massachusetts Constitution was amended to refine the definition of marriage to: “Marriage.  The same laws and procedures that govern traditional marriage also apply to same-sex marriages.  There are no special procedures for a same-sex marriage.” 

After Massachusetts, ten more states—California, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, Oregon, and Washington (The District of Columbia allows same-sex marriages)—joined in the progressive movement in liberalizing the restrictions against same-sex marriages.  Though these measures helped advance gay rights substantially, 27 states have passed laws or acts to ban same-sex marriages.  Polls still reflect that a plurality of Americans are still opposed to same-sex marriage. The fact that this issue is so polarized shows how quite prevalent this battlefield of an issue is.  Keeping with the battlefield analogy, it is hard to approach this issue without addressing the multiple fronts set up from different corners of the schools of thought.  The most prominent fields of thought that hold the most weight over the legalization of same-sex marriage are the progressive community (both intellectual and in the general public), Constitutional law, and the religious community (encompassing both the liberal and fundamental extremes politically and socially).

The American progressives have performed a fantastic job of garnering attention to the issue of legalizing same-sex marriage.  In a decade, eleven states and the capital have declared gay marriage a legal status—such a radical leap from the years before.  When one contemplates this topic, one realizes that the gay rights movement, overall as a movement, has garnered faster results and perhaps more attention than either the Women’s Suffrage movement or the Civil Rights movement in the 1960’s.  Part of this is due to the existence of twenty-four hour media, which also plays a role in shaping public opinion either for or against the authorization of gay marriage.  But progressive voices and organizations have done a thorough job informing the public of the discrimination that homosexual couples face.  Public opinion is inexorably turning towards legalizing gay marriage as the progressive groups cite sources such as popular media figures (Lady Gaga, Kylie Minogue, etc.) and the First Amendment in the United States Constitution.  These resources help the progressives argue their point that there is nothing wrong with same-sex marriage.  They elaborate on this point by clarifying that homosexuality is a natural tendency, shaped by birth and beyond the control of the individual. After all, who would choose to live a life where they must face discrimination at almost every turn?  Because homosexuality is a natural attraction and not a psychological disorder—it was considered such up until 1973 when it was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), gay couples wishing to be titled under marriage with the same rights as heterosexual couples shouldn’t be discriminated against.  The recent bullying incidents that led to multiple suicides only reinforce the will of those in favor of change and equality.  Progressive ideas are steadily changing the minds of the youth in America, which brightens the future for gays to obtain equal rights across the land.  But there is still heavy opposition standing in the way of the progressive movement.

To oppose the front to legalize gay marriage is the social and political movement generated by far-right Christianity.  These social conservatives base their philosophical beliefs around the ancient texts of the Bible, the holy book of the Christian faith.  Usually existing in rural or less populated areas, fundamentalist Christians argue that, because of Biblical texts from the Old Testament, homosexuality is a sin against the word of the Christian god.  Since this is completely subjective, this argument is essentially nullified.  However, there are those who are less extreme that argue that marriage has been an institution between a man and a woman since the start of recorded history, and since it was such an old tradition, it should not be tampered with.  One could also point out that slavery was a tradition that ran from the dawn of civilization to the 19th century, when it was legally abolished. 

The Religious right has grown louder in protest of gay rights in the last few years due to the increasing movement towards legalizing gay marriage.  The angry crowds that line the streets to protest same-sex marriage resemble the crowds that rallied to quell the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s.  Churches such as the Southern Baptists have developed toughening fundamentalist ideas over the issue of gay marriages.  This is not to say that all Baptist churches denounce homosexuality; however, many across the Southern United States have ostracized homosexual individuals and condemned the performance of a gay marriage.  The Mormon Church excommunicated two members from the church after they entered a same-sex marriage. The Mormons also vociferously campaigned to pass Proposition 8 in California back in 2008. Proposition 8 was an amendment to the Californian constitution that would “defend marriage” by outlawing same-sex marriage.  This is not to say that all religious figures fall into this category; there are plenty of religious leaders who would wish to see the popular religious attitude change on the topic of same-sex marriage (like Reverend Carlton from my previous post), though the fundamentalists outnumber the progressive Christians.  Though the voices of the religious right have grown in volume, with political leaders such as Michele Bachmann rallying their voting districts against the legalization, not much can be done to stop the force from coming.

With the progressive movement gaining ground in fight to legalize same-sex marriage, it seems as though the United States might one day join its Western neighbors in legalization; however, the field still remains static and polarized today.

3 comments:

  1. This is a well-organized analysis post of gay marriage. The criteria I am basing this on includes the discussion of the debates and the unbiased support and elaboration of both arguments. Your use of court cases and government laws gives concrete evidence and support for each aspect of the debate. I liked how you made the battlefield analogy of the polarization of the issue; this helps us readers to better understand the matter by relating it to something more common. The only problem I had with this post was that you sometimes used emotional or strong words that can influence a reader’s comprehension of the material due to the bias language. When summarizing the opposing views of such a large debate, it is essential to avoid these types of words and language so that the readers can form their own opinions from the information provided. Overall I think you did a great job researching this topic and presented the material in a nicely structured manner.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good Analysis. I like that you gave a time line of the issue regarding legalizing gay marriage. I thought that this issue was something that just came out recently and I didn’t know that it had a history in this country going back to 1993! I also found it interesting that Europe is ahead of us in solving this issue. I do agree that America is supposed to be setting the example in accepting people of all backgrounds and beliefs regardless of religion. I that brings out more of the fact that church and state is not separated as well as there is a prejudiced thought that if you’re not a Christian or follow everything that in the bible, you’re an unclean person that doesn’t deserve rights. Overall I thought you analyzed the issue very well. You brought out and supported all three schools of thought. You showed that you did your research by presenting all the court cases that were involved with the issue and in addition, I found it effective to relate this issue back to the Civil Rights and Women’s Suffrage movements. Your sentence, “The angry crowds that line the streets to protest same-sex marriage resemble the crowds that rallied to quell the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s”, brought out a lot of emotional appeal. Even though there might be some areas that some might find offensive (i.e.” ancient texts of the bible”) overall I thought it wasn’t too biased and it was a well organized analysis.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Overall, this was a very effective analysis of the issue that clearly situated in a global and historical basis. I think your dismissal of the Christianist argument had some bias because it didn't examine reasons why Christians might be opposed to gay marriage that are within the overall framework of Christian beliefs and outside of the specifics of gay marriage. But overall, good job!

    ReplyDelete