Marriage Equality/ Same-sex Marriage in the United States - Essay Example

no. Same-sex marriage in the United s: protections and rights Some s approved domestic partnerships or civil unions specifically for gay and lesbian couples that want to be married but there are still debates over marriage equality because these alternative unions only afford a measure of legal protection and not the rights as married couples. The aim of this essay if to examine the various protections and right accorded to same-sex couples in the United States. For better comprehension, the essay will focus on those protections and rights that are accorded to straight couples, yet remain elusive for same-sex couples. In the United States, the legal institution of marriage is, according to Lupu & Tuttle (293), monopolized by the individual states. It is mandatory for any person wishing to marry, to obtain a license from the state. As a result, instead of recognizing same-sex marriages, most American states have opted to recognize civil unions and domestic partnerships of people of the same sex. Full recognition of gay and lesbian marriages is still yet to be achieved in the United States, where these couples will be able to enjoy the full range of rights enjoyed by straight couples. There are many cases of same-sex couples being denied the rights and protections that are accorded to straight couples in the United States. For example, Pierceson, Piatti-Crocker, &Schulenberg (209) write that in Florida, gay couples are prohibited from adopting children. In 2006, according to Crehan & Rickenbacker, 52 per cent of the American population was against the recognition by law of same-sex marriages. In addition, this percentage was also against any move to grant same-sex marriages the same rights as traditional marriages. As Pierceson, Piatti-Crocker, &Schulenberg (203) state, not all states approved same sex marriage in the United States. For example, in 2008, California, Florida, and Arizona amended their constitutions to prohibit gay and lesbian relationships. By the close of 2010, Andryszewski (102) states that approximately twenty nine states prohibited same-sex relationships, while Pierceson, Piatti-Crocker, &Schulenberg (209) states that fifteen others were in the process of banning gay and lesbian relationships. On the brighter side, various states have in the recent past been amending their laws to cater for the rights of same-sex unions, although to a lesser degree as compared to the rights enjoyed by straight couples. At present, there are states that recognize civil unions and domestic partnerships between same-sex couples and accord these couples some state benefits. As Andryszewski (102) states, Vermont, Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Hawaii, Washington, Maine, California, and the District of Columbia are examples of states that recognize same-sex civil unions or allow for domestic partnerships for these couples. In these states, same-sex couples can access family health plans, become parents, and even have protection relating to divorce and separation under state laws. Neubauer & Meinhold (401) state that the state of Massachusetts was the first to legalize same-sex marriages; a law in which the couples can be issued with marriage certificates. According to Andryszewski (102), by the close of 2010, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Vermont were issuing same-sex partners with marriage licenses. Massachusetts allows same-sex couples to access tax, health, and social security survivor benefits just like opposite-sex couples. Same-sex unions have been on the increase in recent years, mainly as a result of better legal protections by state laws. However, these unions are far from receiving the equal and constitutional rights as traditional marriages in America. As Crehan & Rickenbacker state, legal rights such as the benefits that come with being someone’s spouse are not accorded to same-sex couples. For instance, Baker writes that it is impossible for a person who is gay or lesbian to inherit property from their partner after death, unless that person pays an inheritance tax, which traditional-marriage spouses are not required to pay. Additionally Stone & Culhane (141) state that it is more difficult for a person in a same-sex marriage to gain access to their partner’s health insurance. Moreover, if a person is lucky enough to be covered by their partner’s employer-based insurance, the partner pays more health taxes than that paid by straight couples. The limitation of civil unions, domestic partnerships, and marriages for same-sex couples is that the protections and rights enjoyed by these couples are limited within state governments and do not apply to the federal government. For example, although same-sex couples in a civil union can file for joint state tax returns, the federal law requires that they file federal tax returns individually. This, according to Girgis, George, & Anderson (280) means that same-sex couples are not granted the same status as straight couples in filing for tax returns. In addition, Baker writes that since individual states vary in their same-sex laws, such couples find it difficult to move from one state to another because their status may not be recognized by other states. Similarly, when it comes to immigration, a foreigner cannot become an American by getting married to a person of the same sex. According to Andryszewski (57), a person in a same-sex union cannot claim for their partner’s legal residence status, if the latter is not a citizen of the United States. Lahey & Alderson (102) give the example of a gay man in Colorado who tried sponsoring his husband for immigration. The request was, however, denied by the federal government on the grounds that the marriage between the two men was not valid under the law. In as far as protection is concerned Lupu & Tuttle (287) state that the federal government in the united state is unable to grant same-sex couples protection from discrimination, especially concerning the provision of goods and services in non-governmental sectors. Similarly, individual states have the constitutional mandate to modify, as they deem fit, legislations touching on protection for same-sex couples against discrimination. Generally, no matter the advances made in the fight for legal recognition of same-sex marriages, the fight is far from over. Ideally, although some states may recognize same-sex unions and grant them state benefits, the federal government does not recognize such unions, and so such partners remain bound to their individual states. According to Girgis, George, & Anderson (283), the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages as it does traditional marriages, thus the former lack the benefits that come with marriage. Cahill (16) writes that all marriage benefits provided for under the federal law, such as joint tax return, spousal benefits, and immigration rights, remain elusive for same-sex partners. The United States, despite being on of the most democratic countries in the world, is still grappling with the issue of whether or not to legalize same-sex marriages. The next issue is whether to grant the partners in same-sex marriages, the same rights and protections as straight couples. Works cited Andryszewski, Tricia. Same-Sex Marriage: Granting Equal Rights or Damaging the Status of Marriage? Minnesota: Twenty-First Century Books. 2011. Print. Baker, Brittney. Same-Sex Marriage and Religion: An Inappropriate Relationship. A Journal of Undergraduate Work, 1.3 (2010). Print. Cahill, Robert. Same Sex Marriage in the United States: Focus on the Facts. Maryland: Lexington Books. 2004. Print. Crehan, Margaret & Katherine Rickenbacker. The Changing Debate on Same-Sex Marriage in the United States, 20 (2007). Print. Girgis, Sheriff, George, Robert & Anderson Ryan. What is marriage? Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 34. 1 (2012): 248-286. Print. Lahey, Kathleen & Alderson Kevin. Same-Sex Marriage. Toronto: Insomniac Press. 2004. Print. Lupu, Ira & Tuttle, Robert. Same-Sex Equality and Religious Freedom. Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy, 5. 2 (2010): 274-306. Print. Neubauer, David & Meinhold Stephen. Judicial Processes: Law, Courts, and Politics in the United States. 6th Ed. Boston: Cengage Learning. 2012. Print. Pierceson, Jason, Piatti-Crocker, Adriana, & Schulenberg Shawn. Same-Sex Marriage in the Americas: Policy Innovation for Same-Sex Relationships. Maryland: Lexington Books. 2010. Print. Stone, Carrie & Culhane John. Same Sex Legal Kit for Dummies. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. 2012. Print. Read More