Activity #9

Activity #9

Homosexuality is a common occurrence in the human population. One out of every nine couples living together is the same sex. Over six million American children alone have at least one gay or lesbian parent. Homosexuality is not just in humans; there are at least four hundred species of animals that display acts of homosexuality as typical behavior. With homosexuality becoming more conventional, why are same-sex marriages still forbidden in many states?

Marriage has traditionally been viewed as a sacred union between a man and a woman in society. Constitutionally and legally the meaning of a marriage has little to do with the societal viewpoint. Emma Goldman describes marriage in a more basic style when she states, “Marriage is primarily an economic arrangement, an insurance pact (389). Legally marriage contracts provide certain privileges to spouses that include benefits such as Social Security, health insurance, life insurance, and the ability to make medical decisions for the spouse. While the Defense of Marriage Act passed into law during the Clinton presidential term defines marriage as between one man and one woman, there is nothing about marriage that allows for this Act to be constitutional. The government is supposed to rise above the popular societal viewpoint and protect the rights of minorities. Homosexual couples are the minorities in need of protection in this case. One could argue that if homosexual couples were allowed to marry, then anyone could marry to gain economic stability, and not for love. There are two points in reply to this: firstly, there is nothing about love in the legal definition of marriage. Secondly, according to law any adult male and adult female couple can marry, even if it is for economic reasons. Many arranged marriages are based primarily on economics. Although the Defense of Marriage Act has been partnered with similar laws passed by at least 38 states (Kurdek 152) the act itself is in violation of an individual’s rights and therefore homosexual marriages should be legalized.

While many societal institutions, especially religious assemblies, view homosexual relationships to be amoral or anomalies of human nature, these opinions should not affect homosexuals’ rights to equal constitutional privileges. According to Kurdek’s study, same sex couples functioned quite similarly to heterosexual couples. The only major difference was the blending of gender roles within the relationship, which is an obvious occurrence due the notion that there are not two genders present. Some could argue that the blending of gender roles conflicts with the traditions of society and could upset the balance that is currently in place. To refute this, one only needs to look at gender roles. The gender roles inside of relationships are not balanced to say the least. Women are casted as weak, docile, and lean towards tasks and stereotypical aspects that deal with the home. Men are described as the opposite; strong, aggressive and in charge of worldly activities. Feminists have been arguing for centuries against these stereotypical roles; therefore just because homosexual couples cannot fall into the two gender system, does not mean that they will upset society. Many individuals that are not homosexual do not fit into the ideal gender role assigned to them. They are not denied their right to marriage because of this. Their right to privacy, especially the privacy between spouses, protects the individual from being ostracized by society. Homosexuals deserve an equal right to privacy, including privacy in a marriage. Furthermore, the children, either biological or adopted, raised by homosexual partners develop equally when compared to children raised by heterosexual couples. Therefore homosexual couples should have the right to marriage and to a family.

Homosexual relationships are comprised of people. This fact alone should be enough for same sex marriages to occur. We are all individuals; while homosexuals are different from the traditional heterosexuals that enter socially approved marriages; they deserve equal rights. Marriage, with all the legal benefits involved, is a right. By denying homosexual couples marriages, they are being denied equal rights. There is no significant proof that a homosexual marriage would be more likely to produce an unstable family than a heterosexual marriage. The reasons for denying the institution of marriage to individuals rest primarily on the hypocritical judgment of society. Based on equality, homosexuals should be allowed to marry.