There are few topics in contemporary American politics that are more controversial or polarized than gay rights, in particular same-sex marriage. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals face extreme discrimination, in not only America, but in most other parts of the world. As the issue grows in the public’s conscience, so does the animosity directed at the gay community.
Since being homosexual or bisexual is an innate trait, the discrimination that the community has to face is unjust. Under many governments, gay couples face extreme social, legal, and financial discrimination; most countries ban same-sex marriage, some even ban homosexuality (mostly concentrated in the Middle East). The United States upholds policies that insure equality in some states regarding same-sex marriage, however, there is no homogenous federal law. Some states do not recognize gay marriages and, therefore, do not provide the financial benefits that are given to heterosexual couples. The states governments who ban same-sex marriages and those who condemn the status justify their views generally with either a religious-based argument or skewed statistics that are taken out of context to compensate for their discriminatory stance.
There is a strong movement to nationally declare gay marriage as a legal agreement. However, due to the political polarization that exists in current American politics, it appears that the movement can only hope for amendments to individual state constitutions. So far, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut are the only states that allow gay marriage (Washington DC also allows the performance of same-sex marriages). New York recognizes gay marriages if held elsewhere. Besides these states listed above, no other states allow the performance of gay marriages. Special interest groups and social conservatism holds same-sex marriage from passing through state legislature, let alone national congress. It is wrong to deny someone privileges held by others or rights because of their sexual orientation. In this blog, I hope to not only show why there is an ethical injustice in denying gays the rights of marriage, but also change the minds of those who oppose same-sex marriage using factual data and unbiased mindset.
I completely agree that same-sex marriage is an extremely controversial debate, especially in America. Although I am not homosexual or bisexual, I still don’t agree with limiting the rights of those who are. I don’t wholeheartedly support this cause, but I do believe that we should be able to express ourselves under human rights. I do recognize that society tend to judge homosexual relationships more harshly than heterosexual relationships. Even so, I do want to challenge your generalization that “As the issue grows in the public’s conscience, so does the animosity directed at the gay community.”; Could it not be argued that as the public gains awareness and understanding about the issue of same-sex marriage and its desires for ratification throughout America, that the public is becoming more knowledgeable and therefore more accepted and possibly supportive of the cause? For me, I can admire the passion of these people who are fighting for their justice without actually supporting or criticizing them.
ReplyDeleteSo this leads me to a few questions I have about the intent of your blog. Will you provide information about the history of same-sex marriage and its course in American societies? What kind of aspects of society and government laws will you use to show how there is this ethical injustice? What kind of arguments and evidence does the opposing side use to justify their views and opinions?
This is a complex topic and I am eager to see how you will persuade readers to see the ethical injustice concerning same-sex marriage!
Thank you for your compliments!
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the quotation you challenged, I believe that I was unclear as to what I was trying to communicate. By growing animosity, I was not only referring to the public's open reaction to gay rights, but the visibility of the hatred as well. Twenty-four hour cable news has played a large role in publicizing this issue, and plays upon emotions with biased reports and commentary (this is certainly not to say that bias on the Internet plays no role in this, however, cable news is still a more popular news media). So when I wrote that there is a growing animosity, I was meaning in the visual realm of the public conscience.
I hope to do my best and answer your questions. This topic tediously webs out into a variety of issues on many different realms of intellectual discussion, so I will try to converse on as many as I can. If you have any further questions about my content or ideas that you feel I have not developed enough, then please feel free to comment!