Cultural and Historic Aspects Surrounding Gay Marriages - Case Study Example

Gay Marriages Should be Approved Introduction Gay marriages are not a new trend since it has been gracing our news print, audio and audio-visual media for quite a period now. Researchers have conducted a number of studies into this matter to identify and gather the opinions of the public, the government and a number of relevant institutions. Efforts into evaluating the social, cultural, and historic aspects surrounding gay marriages in addition to the impact of this topic on family status and all parties involved are evident, and this essay analyzes them accordingly. “Gay marriage” constitutes one of the most controversial topics globally. This is evident from the fact that it has received varied opinions from both opponents and proponents. In every social class, race, ethnicity and religion, marriage is more of a passage rite. The institution of marriage is quite wide in the sense that it incorporates an array of factors ranging from companionship, love, sexual relations, procreation, child rearing, as well as mutual responsibility (Nussbaum). It is however, necessary to note that in our current society, marriage can exist without these factors. In addition, all these factors can exists amongst people who have not yet been married. Same-sex marriage (SSM) is one of the practices that defy some of these factors and unlike other practices that flout the same factors; hence, it has received more opposition and condemnation. Concepts surrounding SSM extend from social and historical to cultural and civic. The civic aspect comes in since the law provides the right to marry for its citizens. Gays do not enjoy these rights as well as the benefits that come with it. Under the social aspect, family, children, and the society come in. Gays cannot form families for they not only lack the right to marry but also the legal right to adopt children in numerous states. In addition, the society gives them a hard time via discriminating against them. Opponents have termed gay marriages as an act that goes against the American cultural norms, hence an immoral move. This has crippled efforts to ensure that SSM becomes legal. The last aspect is the historical concept, which is entangled with religion. It dates back to creation when God first created people of opposite sex and expected them to procreate and the introduction of the Church as well. This cannot be the case with gay couples. These aspects have collaboratively affected the push for gay marriages. The civic aspect has evidently affected gay partners. Denying them the right to marry makes this law discriminatory. When it comes to same sex marriage, the law implementers tend to consider the religious aspect of the matter. This is quite different from the way they handle other matters thus gays should be allowed to marry just as provided by the constitution (Nussbaum). Marriage couples are entitled to a number of benefits from the government. These benefits include favorable treatment in tax inheritance, insurance status, rights to adoption, custody, as well as immigration rights. Usually, these benefits are directed to opposite sex couples and do not recognize gay couples. It is necessary that the state recognize gay marriages so that they are able to enjoy privileges just like other couples. The social aspect surrounding gay marriages is wide. Marriage amongst heterosexual couples occurs following statements of love and commitments declared in front of witnesses (Nussbaum). It is the freedom of these mature couples to declare their statements without any pressure for it marks an important step in their lives. Denying gays the right to pass through such a step is rejecting them a rite of passage. In addition, they are even afraid to come out as gays let alone getting married. This is usually because of the discrimination that accompanies such moves. A family usually compromises of children as well. Gays usually have difficulties when it comes to adopting children. One is because there are not recognized by law as legal adopters and because of the myth that children growing up in a gay family will lack good morals. Gays have usually encountered discrimination from the society yielding to stigma, low self-esteem, rejection, as well as shame (Gonzales 1). This leads to health disparities amongst the stigmatized gay individuals. Since the law does not recognize them, which implies their chances of attaining insurance are low thus affecting them whenever they need medical attention. According to Gonzales, this claim is evident for ‘Most Americans, some 55%, are covered through their own, or a family member’s employer-sponsored health insurance plan (Gonzales 1)’. Once a state legalizes SSMs or civil unions, a number of employers will start treating gay couples with equality. Various research studies have cited gay couples have more chances of reporting cases of depression, alcohol use, as well as anxiety. In addition, since they lack insurance plan, they forgo visiting the hospitals, hence the disparities are not treated early enough. In the United States, same-sex parents raise around 222,000 children (Gonzales 2). The insurance disparity extends to these children. This is usually because employers only extend insurance to children who are related to their employees by birth or through legal adoption hence leaving those with gay parents out. It is necessary to implement laws that protect gay individuals from discrimination when it comes to matters such as housing, employment, and legal adoption (Gonzales 2). Such moves will reduce cases of health disparities amongst this group. The state should critically consider the health benefits that same sex partners need because it is part of their right to access medical facilities. The cultural aspect affecting gay marriages contribute to the fact that it is not legal yet especially in developing states whereby they refute gays strongly. This is quite evident recently in Africa and specifically in Kenya and Uganda whereby the incumbent top leaders had a cold argument with US’ President. Therefore, right to marry (Nussbaum) protects this group of opponents’ claims that it is immoral and fails to realize that even some heterosexuals defy the institution of marriage by indulging in immoral acts yet still. Some of these gays are of good character but still face discrimination under the basis that their marriage will affect the traditional marriage culture of people between opposite sex. Instead of dwelling only on how gay marriages will interfere with the cultural practice, they should also concentrate on how immoral heterosexual also impair the marriage culture. Opponents also claim that marriage between same sex couples cannot result into procreation of children as it is in the culture of heterosexual marriages. It is necessary to note that even some heterosexual parents do not give birth to children due to health issues or mutual decisions. Since this group has the legal right to adopt children, it will be fair enough gays can enjoy same privileges. The historical concept dwells into the early account of the Christian church. Initially, the church was not involved in marriage practices. Actually, the church advocated for celibacy and virginity amongst Christians. Marriage was a compromise to prevent lust, which is a sin. Towards the end of the 12Th era, the Western church introduced the practice of consenting two participants in church before witnesses as a marriage procedure. After the introduction of DOMA and California’s proposition 8, it was objected on the claims that marriage involved having children who needed a mother and a father. This directs to objections of same-sex marriage in terms of gender roles within the marriage. This has affected gay marriages because the historical context directs into a stand on gender roles and cultural obligations of each parent. Gay couples that have managed to raise children have done it successfully and hence conclusions should not be arrived at basing on the historical context but on what is currently evident. Those at stake considering how the issue is defined include both proposers and opponents. They include gays themselves, American Religious Community, the civil unions as well the government. The U.S Supreme court is also a critical part of this issue for it has the power to decide whether the US constitution should also give gays the right to marry (Masci). The religious community is divided on this matter because some support approval of gay marriages whereas some are against it. The Catholic Church together with many evangelical Christian groups are at the forefront in opposing gay marriages whereas The Reform and conservative Jewish movements in addition to other liberal Christian churches are part of the proposing group (Masci). The government and its respective civil unions are also battling on the issue of accepting gay marriages. The government is reluctant in making this issue legal whereas the civil union movements are constantly advocating for legalization of the same. Obama, president of the United States is however part of the groups supporting gay marriages. Currently, a number of states have established civil unions or domestic partnerships which aim to give gay lesbian an array of matrimonial rights and responsibilities but at the same time denies them the ‘right to marry. According to the article, ‘Since 2007, five states – New Jersey, Illinois, Hawaii, Delaware and Rhode Island – have enacted civil union statutes (Masci).’ These legislations range from giving gays limited rights to also giving full matrimonial rights. Those are interested on the topic most include the gay individuals. This is because they are the only ones who are directly affected. When compared to those advocating against and those supporting, the gays are the ones at the centre of the matter. Politicians and other civil unions may have their personal interest in the issue and the interest of the gays may not be their priority. If the court rules towards the favor of this topic by giving them the right to marry, same-sex marriage will now become legal throughout the United states bringing some relive to the gays and their supporters. A contrary ruling will however mean that the fight continues since the gay individuals will not relent. They will appeal further hoping that the government grants them their full rights. Conclusion It will be fair enough if gays have the right to marry and adopt children hence start families. They should be able to do this without facing discrimination from the society. Children raised by gay parents need protection from bullying and harassments in schools so that their future is not ruined. Accepting gays as part of the society will bring the controversial debates that never seem to cease to a permanent halt. . References Gonzales, Gilbert. Why Same Sex Marriage is Important for Good Health. University of Michigan, Scholars Strategy Network. Scholars Strategy Network. 2013. Web. 21St September 2014. Masci, David. Overview of Same-Sex Marriage in the United States. Religion & Public Life Project, Pew Research. Pew Research Center. 7Th December 2012. Web. 21St September 2014. Nussbaum, Martha. A Right to Marry? Same-sex Marriage and Constitutional Law. A Quarterly of Politics and Culture. Dissent Magazine, 2009. Web. 20Th September 2014 Read More