Gay Marriage and its Legalities - Essay Example

Gay Marriage and its Legalities The U.S. Constitution provides the foundational system on which basic human rights are determined, yet often challenged. Gay marriage is generally argued as being an infringement on these generic human rights, thus when the issue is moving through the different judicial branches there is considerable division about the concept’s constitutionality. As of this period, other than challenges that pursue any policy abolition or support regarding gay marriage, the practice maintains its constitutionality as no clear precedent has been developed on how to proceed. For proponents of the human rights issue, the matter would appear to be rather open and shut in terms of challenging constitutionality and this issue impacts decision-making at the social level, even if this practice is discouraged in the rule of law. This division seems to maintain gay marriage and its constitutionality while this divisional approach exists. In defense of this approach, the U.S. Justice Department contends, “Consistent with the rule of law, however, the Department of Justice has long followed the practice of defending federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made in support of their constitutionality, even if the Department disagrees with a particular statute as a policy matter, as it does here." (lawlib.state.ma.us, 2). In defense of those who uphold the constitution as a foundation on which to mold new social policy, leadership recognizes that policy on gay marriage stands and will remain defended providing there is no significant grounds on which to proclaim the act unconstitutional. Federal support for the program without claims of unconstitutionality put this issue much into state level hands, with federal level support in the objective if the goal is to uphold this civil rights matter. The mid-tier court system that governs and shapes these policies is currently made up of very conservative judges and a blend of more liberal decision-makers (Chemerinsky, 3). Division at this level and lack of solid ground on which to claim opportunity for repealing federal policy halts the progress of ensuring adequate legal protection for gay marriage. Under this system, challengers to decisions made at the district level are put forward to the Supreme Court in the pursuit of discretionary review. In general, gay marriage will likely be decided at the highest levels of judicial scrutiny providing that a resolution (either for or against) is determined at the inferior levels of justice. States that allow gay marriage include California, though its momentum is continuously challenged. Proposition 8 was intended to block gay marriage and it was upheld, and then later determined by the district court to be unconstitutional (lawlib.state.ma.us, 3). In this case, adequate evidence was provided to uphold the allowance of gay marriage based on constitutional principles. Connecticut and Iowa are two other states that have used judicial and constitutional principles to uphold gay marriage (lawlib.state.ma.us). Both states believe these fundamental human rights and express the stand of the state, backed by constitutional values, for securing inclusion into the legal definition of marriage. Other states, such as New York, have equal protection laws associated with it that recognize the same sex marriage rights when these bonds were secured out of the state. There appears to be a slow yet steady evolution backed with federal support and justice systems that abide by non-biased decision-making against the Constitution. Gay marriage does represent a human rights issue. I”n fact, the sexual orientation of gays and lesbians is as much a God-given characteristic as the color of their skin or the sexual orientation of their straight brothers and sisters” (Boies, 2). These are the foundational principles that guide the structure of the Constitution and individuals that challenge its appropriateness are left with a difficult task of repealing such laws that might exist to express same sex marriage freedom. However, outside of the law are more sociological aspects to gay marriage that should be considered before taking a solid stand on the practice. It is the focus and responsibility of social workers, counselors and therapists, and those who work to uphold a more functional national culture to recognize individuals that require a self-assessment. When laws were first being developed in support of gay marriage, partnered individuals of varying demographics were in a mad rush to have their relationship validated as marriage through the rule of law. It is the fundamental freedom of those involved in same sex marriages to determine the value and basis of quality between partners and determine whether the long-term commitment is worth the short term gain of proclaiming civil liberties victory. Underneath the dramatic and the legal challenges that are continuously given visibility through mass media mediums, this group often has a fundamental misunderstanding regarding relationships when considering the majority of individuals in this particular segment of culture. A recognized legal marriage creates a formal contract which makes it much more difficult to dissolve in the event of evolving personal goals and values or any other lifestyle disagreement that challenges the union’s sanctity. Having had personal experience with many representatives from the gay and lesbian culture, the duration of homosexual relationships is often short-lived. Some of the issues that break down these quality bonds are unique and very little distinguishes the negativity from similar life events in the heterosexual union. Proper coping strategies to handle these crisis scenarios within the union need to be effectively in place before making the decision to legalize a partnered union. From a personal perspective, the rationale for gay marriage should be equal to, or greater than, the benefits that exist within the non-recognized partnership. Even at the social level, duration and quality of relationships act as the foundation to celebrate its creation and to support it at the community level. Like the effervescent tablet, if quick dissolve formulas are the equation that guide lifestyle, proponents of gay marriage are modestly justified in holding this opinion. There are social, personal and civil risks in gay marriage. Works Cited Boies, David. “Gay Marriage and the Constitution” The Wall Street Journal. (2010). Viewed November 21, 2010 at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124804515860263587.html Chemerinsky, Erwin. “Gay Marriage and the Constitution”. Saturday Night Magazine. (n.d.). Viewed November 21, 2010 at http://www.snmag.com/MAGAZINE/Features/Gay-Marriage-and-the-Constitution.html Lawlib.state.ma.us. “Massachusetts Law about Same-Sex Marriage”. Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries. (2010). Viewed November 22, 2010 at http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/subject/about/gaymarriage.html Read More