Freedom of Marriage Essay

The reasoning of any just law is meant to be rational and, moreover, fair. However, the government has failed to recognize the dependables of some Ameri sack up citizens because they do non conform to parliamentary procedures stereotypical standards. In a community founded on freedom, have todays citizens evolved into narrow-minded drones that bind minorities into what they c only back are the correct moral standards? Have the basic freedoms guaranteed by our forefathers been au naturel(p) away in order to protect the strict moral codes ordination has placed upon itself.Same-sex spousal relationship should be legal because it is discriminatory to deny queer mates the same rights as heterosexual couples. The illegalization of same-sex marriage excludes festal couples from the same monetary marital benefits guaranteed to hook up with heterosexuals. The denying of these rights is no longer a decision to be made by the U. S. government as religious rulings are strongly i mbedded in the ceremony of marriage. Contrary to common beliefs, the legalization of same-sex marriage has non degraded the traditional values associated with a marriage.The geological formational right of marriage is currently being denied to many American citizens. The actions of many have contributed to diversity a strivest a minority who deserve their birthright as American citizens to sexual union in transvestite unions. Exclusion of marital benefits from transgendered couples contributes to the large pecuniary strain of being comical. Taxation relief, family wellness care benefits, social hostage spousal benefits, and inheritance rights all lessen the financial burden on get married heterosexual couples, but these benefits do not pertain to married humans today.All of these benefits excluding same-sex couples lead to an exponentially higher cost of living. In our bastinado case, the couples lifetime cost of being audacious was $467,562. unless the number fell to $41,196 in the best case for a couple with significantly better health insurance, plus lower taxes and other costs. (Siegel Bernard, Lieber) The metrical composition represent the discriminatory effects of illegalizing homosexual marriage. Same-sex couples, become strangers to the basic rights of casualness and the pursuit of happiness, and re at risk for minority stress and its health consequences. (Riggle, Thomas, Rostosky)In a country founded on equal rights, American laws pertaining to rattling marriage necessitate punishment on individuals notwithstanding seeking to gain a right heterosexuals already have. Religious beliefs present the most glib arguments against the legalization of gay marriage. The majority of religions strictly prohibit the union of homosexual couples as the union supposedly to defile the religious ceremony of marriage. whatever may recognize the validity of this argument however, the U. S. government should not be influenced by this religious defens e when considering illegality of homosexual marriage. America was founded on the belief in freedom of religion, which is why 221 years ago the first amendment to the U. S. constitution restricted the government from having any religious affiliations. The amendment stands today as the overwhelm counterpoint against illegalization of gay marriage due to religious conflicts.The government does not have the right to illegalize homosexual marriage based unaccompanied on religious prohibition of the practice. Many individuals believe that same-sex marriage pull up stakes increase the already high divorce rates. This belief is propelled by the misconception that the grounding of marriage surrender be weakened by the allowance of homosexual unions thus increasing leniency of divorce. Allowing same-sex marriage depart not foul up family values, but will instead generate a refreshing family dynamic.This new model of a family will not affect the traditional aspects of a family it will simply leave the option of same-sex marriage open. The derogatory affects of same-sex marriage in society are so minimal that, In Massachusetts, which legalized gay marriage in 2004, the divorce rate has declined by 21 percentage and is the lowest in the country by some margin. The state which experience the highest increase in its divorce rate over the period (Alaska, 17. 2 percent) also happens to be the first one to have altered its constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage in 1998. (Silver) Based on these statistics, same-sex marriage will not be detrimental to society.Those opposing gay marriage ofttimes argue that a homosexual couples inability to create is what makes them ineligible for marriage. It is obvious that is anatomically impossible for homosexual couples to reproduce, leading many to question the inclination of gay marriage if procreation is unfeasible. Marriage was created to allow society to support heterosexual couples in procreation and society can choose not to give the same benefits to same-sex couples. (Jacobson) If marriages only purpose were to support reproduction, homosexual couples would have essentially no purpose for getting married.However, many successfully married heterosexual couples cannot reproduce because of incurable medical conditions. Without the ability to procreate, they would be fairly denied the right to marriage as well as homosexuals. Therefore, the argument presented is invalid because it does not address all couples without the ability to reproduce. The illegalization of same-sex marriage is to be determined by the value society places on fairness.Economically homosexual couples should fetch the same compensations for being married as heterosexual couples are provided with. The resulting reimbursements would diminish financial struggles many homosexual couples encounter over the course of their lifetime. Spiritually gay couples deserve the right to freely exhibit their sexual passions without any discrim inatory actions expressed by religious followers. Furthermore, the government should not consider these religious beliefs when determining the laws confining ones one right to participate in a homosexual marriage.Although many believe that the allowance of gay marriage will directly result in higher divorce rates, the freedom to be in a gay marriage has shown no direct correlation to divorce rates in states granting gay marriage. The illegalization of gay marriage is discriminatory against a minority of American citizens whose only desire is to be given the same rights as heterosexuals. The prejudice opinions opposing gay couples must be set aside in order for homosexuals to receive the benefits they fairly deserve.