History to the legalization of same sex marriage

There are a number of stigmas across the globe regarding the legalization of same-sex marriage. Some of the countries such as US have brought about several reforms which recognise the right to marriage of homosexuals. management, the move has received huge backlash from certain sections of the society. A number of views have been placed for and against the same-sex marriage. Some are of the opinion that same-sex marriage could result in high number of sexually transmitted disease. The same-sex marriage has been seen to violate the laws of nature, which often goes against the interest of the spiritual organizations. Recently, there has been a global move favouring the occurrence of same-sex marriage. Some of the views supporting the same-sex marriage have been presented over here such as reduction in the rate of divorce owing to infertility issues. Additionally, same-sex marriage has been seen to promote the aspects of adoption which serves as common good for the society (Gerstmann 2017).  Some feel that the right to same-sex marriage has been immorally denied to people for a long period of time.  The same-sex marriage is a matter of choice and is no ways involved or could hurt the religious sentiments of people.

Statement of topic: Is legalization of same-sex marriage a right thing to do?

The current study highlights the importance of the legalization of same-sex marriage. The right to family and marriage is a personal choice and should not be judged based on social stereotypes or holy testaments. A number of countries and states across the world have shown their support for the legalization of the same-sex marriage. Some of the countries which have depicted a progressive move in this regard are- US, HOLLAND, DENMARK, ENGLAND, FINLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY and many more.

The first legalization of the same-sex marriage had been presented by Netherland as early as the year 2000. In a landmark bill passed by the Dutch constitution, a single line was changed in the existing civil marriage statute where it was mentioned that “Marriage can be contracted between two people of same or different sex”. In the year 2003, the Belgian government provides the gay and lesbian couples with same tax and inheritance rights as the heterosexual couples (britannica.com 2018).  Later, in the year 2006, the parliament granted the same sex couple the right to adopt children. In 2010, the Denmark government allowed same-sex married couples with registered partnerships the right to adopt children (usatoday.com 2018). On April 17, 2013, New Zealand became the first country in the Asia Pacific region to legalize gay marriage.

Evidence supporting legalization of same sex marriage

There are a number of reasons which favours the legalization of the same-sex marriage. As mentioned by Powell  et al. (2015), there had been a lot of social backlash in the 50’s which put a taboo on marriage of individuals from different racial communities. accounting, with time such notions have been disregarded and people have become more accepting of the rights of people to marry the individual they like irrespective of the case, creed and gender. Therefore, passing some of the legal bills in favour of the same sex marriage can provide them with greater presentation within the mainstream, as it has been seen that the Same-sex couples are denied some of the basic rights which every married couple otherwise have. The same-sex partners are allowed to enter into civil union partnership. As argued by Baiocco  et al. (2016), same-sex marriage is not seen in equal eye in the lawsuit, as compared to the heterosexual couples the homosexual couples are kept away from a number of financial, medical and social rights which are otherwise granted in normal courtship.

The same-sex marriage could be supported with the help of a number of theories such as the Queer theory. It emerged out of the fields of Queer studies and women’s studies in the 1990’s. The queer theory focuses on mismatches between gender and sexuality patterns. It criticizes the social attitude towards legalization of same-sex marriage. As mentioned by Siegel (2017), it deconstructs the existing monolithic ideals of social norms. It falsifies any thoughts processes which consider heterosexual marriage as the only respectable institution and criticize the ones which fall outside the socially acceptable standards. The theory offers a critical lens to understand the hatred and the negative emotions present within the people regarding same-sex marriage. It has been seen that in many cases same sex couples are referred to as sinners, as they have defied the conventional strategies of the society and are often debarred from entering their own local community. As mentioned by Baiocco et al. (2016), the implementation of such radical changes is often seen to challenge the rock solid foundations of the society which are built around a number of myths. Though the lawsuits have acknowledged the right to same-sex marriage and provide them with equal space and presentation within the society, there lays a number of discrepancies. This is because the civil union fails to provide equal rights to the same-sex couple as are provided to the heterosexual couples. Recently, a number of counties across the world have allowed the same-sex couples with additional rights such as adoption, as it could provide home to the homeless. However as argued by Buckley (2010), there are a number of disputes related to the provision of parental rights to the same-sex couple. One school of thought proposes that the child may find it difficult to accept such a unique parental relationship and growing up within the same sex environment may modulate the sexuality of the child during the teenage years in a negative way. However, as mentioned by Hawkins and Carroll (2015), giving the same-sex couples the power to adopt can help by providing them with a better social stance. As argued by, adoption can provide better socio-economic conditions which favour the utmost growth and development of a child.

A number of literature source have been evaluated over here in order to present support or critic the same-sex marriage. The same-sex marriage is yet to be legalized in certain eastern and developing nations and is considered with a lot of speculations. The discussion over here provides a detailed eye to each and every perspective. The acceptance of the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, bisexual and transgender) couples to the mainstream could prevent incidences such as suicide, as it has been found that the rate of suicide within the LGBT community is high. As mentioned by Wolff (2017), the passing of a law favouring same-sex marriage could reduce the social stigma as well as reduce the violence inflicted upon the LGBT community in this regard. As argued by Hawkins and Carroll (2015), the LGBT marriage could break the social stereotypes such where the husband was given the sole right to control the wife once they were wed.  Additionally, there are stereotyped roles for both the husband and the wife where the husband would be treated as the bread earner and the wife the carer of the home. Therefore, same-sex marriage would put an end to such a stereotype by providing both the partners with equal roles and responsibilities. This has been further supported by the Queer theory which further argues against limiting the roles of the society within any particular gender. Some of the views presented by the author over here have helped to understand the role, the changes in stereotype does in expanding the role of the family rather than confine oneself to the definition of marriage. The LGBT community is often eyed with scorn and detest by the society, which often makes them subject to violence and social oppression (Siegel 2017). Therefore, supporting the same-sex marriage can provide the individual partners with social and family security and prevent them from abuse. However, the views supported by the queer theory over here have been further contradicted by some other school of thoughts. As mentioned by Lasorsa  et al. (2018), the LGBT discriminations can have a deleterious effect on the quality of relationship of the same sex individuals. As argued by Wolff (2017), same-sex relationship has the same stressors as a heterosexual relationship and could subject an individual to greater degrees of violence or oppression in the lack of an effective legal framework.

There has been huge debate upon the legalization of same-sex marriage as it has been seen to produce a number of consequences such as decrease in the rate of opposite sex marriage. It has been seen that same-sex couple have better relatibility with regards to thinking patterns and way of life. On the other hand, people in heterosexual relationship often suffer from gender ego hassles which have been seen to double the rate of divorce. As argued by Pollard and Garcia (2017), each one of us feels the safest and most ready to confide in the company of our best friends who are mostly of the same sex. Therefore, in due course of time marrying one’s best friend from the same sex could be a plausible option.

The author here presents his views from a neutral perspective and tries to highlight the various myths held onto regarding same-sex marriage by the society. As mentioned by Dinno and Whitney (2013), there has been greater resistance to same-sex marriage from parents worldwide. The parents are not open to their children entering into same-sex marital relationship, as it had been highlighted by many parents that they were sceptical of their children being subjected to greater amount of stigma and discrimination within the society (Gates 2015). Through introspection, the author rightly questions the definition of family within the society.

There have been greater speculations regarding the protection and the rights provided to same-sex married people. As mentioned by Hunter (2012), some of the policies such as the Defence of Marriage  Act (DOMA) present in this regard have been seen to provide equitable rights to the same-sex married couple. Here, DOMA had been implemented by the court of law to provide equal standing to the same-sex marriage. However, it had been rightly referred to by the author that the success rate of the legal policies implemented in this regard was dependent upon the support and cooperation from the LGBT community. As mentioned by Buckley (2015), a large number of same-sex couples are unwilling to get married due to the social stigma surrounding same-sex marriage. Therefore, the author rightly presents that the passing of the DOMA could change the status of such couples who could willfully enter into a married relationship. As mentioned by Hunter (2012), the widespread reach and success of the DOMA were also dependent upon effective support and participation from the federal government agencies. It had been seen that the difference of opinions of various political parties often hinders the progress of the implementation of effective LGBT rights. The author had also rightly mentioned in his paper that the cumbersome legal procedures often affect the implementation rate of the effective policies.

Additionally, there have been a number of arguments presented in the court of law which states that same-sex couples are not ideally fit to make effective parents on adoption of a child. As mentioned by Bernstein (2015), there have been additional speculations regarding the effect of presentation of the same-sex marriage within the white middle-class people and the marginalized class of people alike. The author rightly places sufficient importance on topics such as equal representation of the same-sex couple within the mainstream society as well as the parental rights of the same-sex couple. The goal is to deconstruct the definition of gender and focus more on the aspect of family. As mentioned by Gates (2015), the development of a family is based more on culture and ethics and is irrespective of caste, creed and gender.  

Additionally, there exists a strong relationship between state and marriage regulations which have been further evaluated through the paper. It has been stated that in developing or less progressive countries there exists much scepticism regarding the benefits of the same-sex marriage (Crespi 2015). As highlighted by the author, the stigma and the oppositions imposed by the society also affect the lawsuits. That is, for example, the same-sex couples are allowed to enter into a legally acknowledged relationship under civil union. However, there are exceptions as some of the freedom and basic rights are not provided to the same-sex couples as of the heterosexual couples (Hawkins and Carroll 2015). For example, in heterosexual marriage, the wife is entitled to ask the husband for providing alumni to her in case the divorce happens with mutual consent on amicable ground. However, there exist a number of exceptions with same-sex marriage where some of the fundamental legal rights are not provided to them, whereas the same-sex couples are equally prone to physical and mental damage protection to that of any other heterosexual couples and should be trialled under the same court of law instead of any civil union. As argued by Lasorsa et al. (2018), the exclusion of the same sex people from the mainstream lawsuits can further lead to misrepresentation of their community. The author here favours the aspect of same-sex marriage and emphasises the role of the state in legalization of the same-sex marriage, which is again dependent upon the federal lawsuits.

Conclusion 

The current study focuses upon the aspect of the legalization of same-sex marriage. The same-sex marriage has faced greater criticism and speculations from the society as many are still not open to the idea. Additionally, many religious institutions have referred to same-sex marriage as a violation of the religious code. However, it has to be understood sexuality and choice of partner is a choice and marrying the same-sex partner could be constituted as one of the basic fundamental rights (Pinsof and Haselton 2016).

Therefore, the same-sex couples from getting married can be a violation of the fundamental rights. Additionally, they are subjected to greater degree of stigma and discrimination from the society which often results in dire consequences such as the same-sex couples committing suicide or getting addicted to drugs to cope up with the mental pressure. Recently, there have been vast changes in the legalization status of the same-sex marriage. Though marriage has been allowed under the civil union there are discrepancies regarding the legal rights and freedom which are allowed to the heterosexual couples and not granted to the same-sex couple. Therefore, uniformity in the lawsuit needs to be established along with bringing about positive changes within the mentality of people for effectively supporting the legalization of same sex marriage.

References

Baiocco, R., Argalia, M. and Laghi, F. 2016, ‘The desire to marry and attitudes toward same-sex family legalization in a sample of Italian lesbians and gay men’, Journal of Family Issues, vol.35, no.2, pp.181-200.

Bernstein, M. 2015, ‘Same-sex marriage and the future of the LGBT movement: SWS presidential address’, Gender & Society, vol. 29, no.3, pp.321-337.

britannica.com 2018, britannica.com , Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/same-sex-marriage [Accessed on 1 Jun 2018]

Buckley, K. 2015, ‘I wasn’t born here: Using the 2010 General Social Survey to examine social attitudes of foreign-born individuals toward the death penalty, same-sex marriage, and legalization of marijuana’, Texas State Undergraduate Research Journal, vol.3, no.1, pp.15-25.

Cao, H., Zhou, N., Fine, management., Liang, Y., Li, J. and Mills?Koonce, W.R. 2017, ‘Sexual Minority Stress and Same?Sex Relationship Well?being: A Meta?analysis of Research Prior to the US Nationwide Legalization of Same?Sex Marriage’, Journal of Marriage and Family, vol.79, no.5, pp.1258-1277.

Crespi, L. 2015, ‘Considering the impact of the legalization of same-sex marriage on the psychological health of lesbians’, Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society, vol. 20, no. 3, pp.228-232.

Dinno, A. and Whitney, C. 2013, ‘Same sex marriage and the perceived assault on opposite sex marriage’, PloS one, vol. 8, no.6, p.e65730.

Dion, M.L. and Díez, J. 2016, ‘Social desirability bias and question framing effects: evidence from a combined list and framing experiment on same-sex marriage support in Argentina’, In Communication au Fourth Annual Toronto Political Behaviour Workshop, University of Toronto ,pp.45-67.

Gates, G.J. 2015, ‘Marriage and family: LGBT individuals and same-sex couples’, The Future of Children, 25(2), pp.67-87.

Gerstmann, E. 2017, Same-sex Marriage and the Constitution, London:Cambridge University Press, pp.102-134.

Hagai, E.B. and Crosby, F.J. 2016, ‘Between Relative Deprivation and Entitlement: An Historical Analysis of the Battle for Same-Sex Marriage in the United States’, In Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research (pp. 477-489). Springer, New York, NY.

Hawkins, A.J. and Carroll, J.S. 2015, ‘Beyond the expansion framework: how same-sex marriage changes the institutional meaning of marriage and heterosexual men’s conception of marriage’, Ave Maria L. Rev., vol.13, p.219.

Hunter, N.D. 2012, ‘The Future Impact of Same-Sex Marriage: More Questions Than Answers’, pp.105-125

Lasorsa, D.L., Suk, J. and Fadnis, D. 2018, ‘Framing of same-sex marriage over 17 years in two newspapers is linked to ideology especially in election years’, Newspaper Research Journal, p. 666.

Pinsof, D. and Haselton, M. 2016, ‘The political divide over same-sex marriage: Mating strategies in conflict?’, psychology science, vol.27, no.4, pp.435-442.

Pollard, M. and Garcia, I. 2017, ‘Exploring the Social Security Benefit Implications of Same-Sex Marriage’, pp.205-336.

Powell, B., Quadlin, N.Y. and Pizmony-Levy, O. 2015, ‘Public opinion, the courts, and same-sex marriage: Four lessons learned’, Social Currents, vol.2, no.1, pp.3-12.

Raifman, J., Moscoe, E. and Austin, S.B. 2017, ‘Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage and Drop in Adolescent Suicide Rates: Association But Not Causation—Reply’, JAMA pediatrics, vol. 171, no.9, pp.915-916.

Raifman, J., Moscoe, E., Austin, S.B. and McConnell, M. 2017, ‘Difference-in-differences analysis of the association between state same-sex marriage policies and adolescent suicide attempts’, JAMA pediatrics, vol.171, no.4, pp.350-356.

Schnabel, L. and Sevell, E. 2017, ‘Should Mary and Jane Be Legal? Americans’ Attitudes toward Marijuana and Same-Sex Marriage Legalization, 1988–2014’, Public Opinion Quarterly, vol, 81, no.1, pp.157-172.

Siegel, R. 2017, ‘Same-Sex Marriage and Backlash: Consensus, Conflict, and Constitutional Culture’, pp.142-155.

usatoday.com 2018, usatoday.com , Available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/06/24/same-sex-marriage-timeline/29173703/ [Accessed on 31 May 2018]

Wolff, K.B. 2017, ‘“I Do, I Don’t”: The Benefits and Perils of Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage in the United States—One Year Later’, Humanities, vol. 6, no.2, p.12.