she turned me into a newt!
Friday, January 21, 2005
Thursday, January 20, 2005
Monday, January 17, 2005
Sunday, January 09, 2005
Rachel Edwards
Recently, the call from the gay and lesbian citizens of America for gay marriage rights has grown louder, growing so loud they managed to distract the 2004 election from issues like an unjust war in Iraq and terrorists to gay marriage. The country is in an uproar about marriage. Loving gay couples pleading with the government to recognize there relationship and give them rights, like to see there significant other while at the hospital and even to arrange the funeral when the other dies, while the overly religious politicians and a over whelming amount of homophobic citizens just don’t like the idea of two men together. Same-sex couples should be allowed to have all the same rights, privileges and responsibility to there significant other as opposite-sex couples get while married, no matter what it may be called, civil unions or marriage it does not matter.
To fully understand the gay marriage issue one must have a general background, starting in 1924 when The Society for Human Rights in Chicago became Americas first know gay rights organization. Later in 1951 Harry Hay formed the Mattachine Society which was the first national gay rights organization. Many consider the gay rights movement to be founded by Harry Hay. Five years later The Daughters of Bilitis, is founded they were a pioneering national lesbian organization. Finally laws began to change when in 1962 Illinois became the first state to decriminalize homosexual acts done by consenting adults in privacy. The stonewall riots in 1969 truly transformed the gay rights movement, causing a widespread protest for equal rights. In 1973 homosexuality was taken off the official list of mental disorders by the American Psychiatric Association. The first state to outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was no other then Wisconsin in 1982. The U.S. military in 1993 began its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, while President Clinton had intended to allow gays in the military he found to much stiff opposition ending up with a compromise that resulted in the discharge of thousands of men and women from the armed forces. Civil unions made there appearance in Americas courts when Vermont decided to legally recognize them in 2000. This was a huge step for the gay rights movement, with the law stating “couples would be entitled to the same benefits, privileges, and responsibilities as spouses.” in November of 2003, Massachusetts supreme judicial court ruled that barring homosexuals from marring goes against the state’s constitution, the Massachusetts Chief Justice said that to “deny the protections, benefits, and obligations conferred by civil marriage” to homosexual couples would be unconstitutional. Then finally on May 17, 2004 Massachusetts made same-sex marriages legal.
(http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0761909.html)
People have always been redefining marriage. At one time black and white citizens of America were not aloud to marry. It was illegal for citizens of Chinese origin and Caucasian citizens to marry at once to. Back in bible days a man could have many wives. Laws change as the culture changes. America culture no longer accepts racism so therefore can not have laws prohibiting African Americans from marring Caucasian Americans. America is no longer under the red scare so now it’s okay again to marry a Chinese person. Laws change with the minds of the nation, America is growing increasingly fair-minded as a melting pot should be, that is an important reason for America to except homosexual couples and allow them to marry.
According to Albert R. Hunt, an inconclusive study done recently in Britain of 50 children suggested that children raised by gay or lesbian parents are more inclined to have a homosexual experience themselves. While some would claim this be a just cause to not allow same-sex couples adopt, others believe it to be irrelevant to the argument. Albert R. Hunt also states that “while the social right insists on the sanctity of married couple adoptions, one out of four Florida adoptions is by a single parent. According to Albert R. Hunt there is “considerable anecdotal evidence suggesting gays and lesbians disproportionately are willing to take these hard-to-adopt kids”. In Florida and other states many hard-to-adopt children are shuffled from foster home to foster home rather then being adopted by same-sex couples that wish to adopt them. Same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt thought-out the entire united states.
In 2004 gay marriage was made legal in Massachusetts. The president George Bush responded with “marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a women …today’s decision … violates this important principle. I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage.” Bush means to trump the Massachusetts court by passing a federal constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage.
Civil Unions are truly a compromise between those for gay marriage and those against. Civil unions are really the same thing as marriages just under a different name, as stated by Deborah L. Markowitz, Secretary of State, “Parties to a civil union shall have all the same benefits, protections and responsibilities under Vermont law, whether they derive from statute, policy, administrative or court rule, common law or any other source of civil law, as are granted to spouses in a marriage.” Vermont is the first state to use civil unions, having started in 2000. Gay rights activists still fight for full marriage rights, saying that it is unconstitutional to discriminate against them for gender while applying for marriage licenses. It would seem the United States could go two ways with this. Continue to recognize the genders as “different but equal” just as they once did with race, or see the genders as the same as they do now with the races. Same-sex couples can only enter into marriage if genders are considered to be the same rather then “different but equal”. Civil unions are as fair and constitutional as you can get unless you take the “same” viewpoint on gender.
Domestic partnerships in California are not the same as civil unions and especially marriages but are a step in the right direction. While not granting all of the same benefits of marriage, domestic partners receive some such as, access to family court, ability to have custody of a partner’s child, the right to make funeral arrangements and access to married student housing. This law is not in effect yet but is scheduled to be in January 2005. Domestic partnerships also include couples of opposite-sex with a member who is over 62.
In October of 2003 a survey was cast on the general public, the poll resulted in 61% said no when asked whether gay marriages should be recognized as valid by law, while 35% said yes. This might suggest the courts are flawed in there service of the public but Elizabeth birch, director of gay rights organization human rights campaign said “the courts are not obliged to support a majority of the people… if not for courts, African-Americans would not have had the right to vote, women would not have the right to vote… the purpose of a constitution is to protect a minority group from the wrath of the majority.”
Gay rights have come a long way, at one time in America it was illegal to practice homosexual activities, and now same-sex couples are getting married in Massachusetts. Depending on each persons background this could be a great thing or a bad thing, that defies the sanctity of marriage. The people’s opinion does not seem to count, for the courts have stepped in and made it legal for same-sex couples to marry, get civil unions or have a domestic partnership.
