A Fundamental Right Essay Research Paper A

A Fundamental Right Essay, Research Paper

A Fundamental Right

.You are now wife and wife..

Amy leans over to kiss her new wife, Terri. The wedding was beautiful as any wedding inside a church. It was a beautiful warm sunny day in May. The two brides now feel a sense of togetherness and a false sense of true commitment even though the state will not recognize their marriage.

Myself, a young lesbian woman, would like to see myself being able to marry my partner. Society has become more tolerant of gays and lesbians in the last couple of years and we are all uniting to carry our voice to be able to marry the one we love regardless of race, religion, or sex.

Gays and lesbians have been denied the right to marry for too long. The United States does not allow same-sex marriages because it is not the traditional view of a family or life. Marriages should not only be for one man and one woman, but also extend the right to include same-sex couples.

The government does not care that these two people love each other, and want to make this commitment. The government is denying gays and lesbians the right to feel like they are a part of a society. Gays and lesbians will always feel like an outcast as long as they are treated like one. One could in no way have true self-confidence if one feels like they do not belong. Imagine the stress one must feel knowing that you could never marry the one you love.

Married couples for years have used the insurance of one spouse and taken advantage of benefits that unmarried couples do not have. Married couples together can file joint tax returns. Spouses can gain insurance provided by their spouse.s company. If one of the spouses dies then the other automatically gets the deceased.s assets. Then they can collect their social security. Evan Wolfson states in his report .The Global Marriage Project,. that ten years after Denmark legalized same-sex marriages many benefits arised (Wolfson 1). Wolfson uses this to show how well same-sex marriages worked in Denmark, one then wonders, why would it not work anywhere else. Paula Ettlebrook states in the book The Question of Equality that she .wants our relationships to be respected.. (Ettlebrook 161)

It is not right that married couples are able to get so many rights and privileges that families, couples, or individuals that are not defined by marriage can not receive. It is insulting that any benefits, such as social security, would be provided to the widowed spouse who was married for only one year, but if a lesbian or a gay person was with their partner for thirty years and one dies the other does not receive social security benefits. This is not fair and our society does not see how it is hurting some people.

Ettelbrook also makes a strong point when she states that no one will understand the pain a gay or lesbian must feel when he or she hears that his or her partner was in an accident. Once the partner arrived at the hospital they are not permitted to see their loved one while they are in Intensive Care or are they able to ask a nurse how they are doing just because they are not considered family (Lesbian and Gay Marriage 25). I could not imagine the distress one must feel at this time, not knowing what is going to happen to the one you love, and want to spend the rest of your life with.

In 1996 President Clinton passed the Defense of Marriage Act. The Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage as .the legal union between one man and one woman,. it prevents same-sex couples from receiving survivor benefits, tax breaks, and other advantages married couples receive. The Defense of Marriage Act authorizes states to deny recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other states, which is a violation of the U. S. Constitutions. guarantee that each state will give .full faith and credit. to the other states (NOW Issue Report: Same-sex marriage 1).

During an internet interview with Michelle, a lesbian who lives in Illinois, stated when I asked her about the Defense of Marriage Act that she thinks .we should be able to decide who we want to marry, male female that is up to us. (Michelle 1).

The Supreme Court noted that the freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness. The Court has also recognized that individuals cannot be denied the essential elements of their happiness as long as those essential elements do not harm others (NOW Issue Report: Same-sex marriage 1). The right to marry the person you choose is a right that is granted to free men and women, that the court is denying to gays and lesbians who are also free men and woman. Denying the right to same-sex marriage is saying that the government and society does not view gays and lesbians as free men and women. Denying homosexuals freedom is going against the Constitution which grants every man and woman freedom.

The traditional view of a family is a father, mother, son or daughter not two men or two woman. Traditionalists say that marriage is for children, and homosexuals do not have children, therefore, we should not be able to marry. This goes back to the traditional family where two men cannot produce children as well as two women. Gay activists argue that marriage should be about love, if two women or two men love each other then they should be allowed to marry as well as a man