Taking a Stand for Gay Marriages

Michelle HornerBlog Post #7June 27, 2007
What’s the Deal with Gay Marriages?
I was brought up with the mentality “do what makes you happy.” How are we supposed to do this if people are restricted on their basic freedoms by the government? Marriage has been around as long as time it seems. One of the Ten Commandments forbids adultery. In the Christian view, marriage is one of the most holy sacraments. My question is when did the government begin to take religious views on its laws, namely the law of marriage? If all humans are equal, then why does it matter if I want to marry a woman or if my good male friend wants to marry his one true love, who just so happens to be another man. Marriage is marriage, and the law should say so.
The major opponents to the legalization of gay marriages offer seemingly great arguments, yet they have some large flaws. For example, in Lisa Schiffren’s essay “Gay Marriage, an Oxymoron” she states that “in traditional marriage, the tie that really binds for life is shared responsibility for children” (Barnet 554). She claims that any marriage that does not involve procreation should, in essence, be nullified in the legal sense. This is ultimately a flawed point of view. Schiffren does not take into account that in many states it is legal for any person to adopt children which is a good alternative for homosexuals who want children. She also fails to recognize one of the major reasons that people get married. People are married to join souls and to live happily with one another as life partners. It would be extremely outrageous to require those who get pregnant to marry the father to uphold the integrity of marriage, or to require those who are married to stay together just because they have children together. It is also ludicrous to have those who have chosen to devote their lives to one another and get married but later find out that they are infertile have their marriage nullified. What about the older generation that has been married or widowed that finds new love and wants that to be recognized, yet the law refuses to allow it because the female is too old and can’t produce more children. This position would be completely outrageous in practice.
There are many reasons that homosexuals should be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples when it comes to the issue of marriage laws. In his essay, Thomas B. Stoddard used an analogy to compare the issue we deal with now, gay marriage, with the older issue of race. He argued that it was “as recently as 1967, before the Supreme Court declared miscegenation statues unconstitutional, sixteen states still prohibited marriages between a white person and a black person” (Barnet 552). This analogy fits perfectly with the issue of gay marriage rights. What was seen at the time as a perfectly legal and morally correct law can now be viewed as an utterly discriminatory law that was rightfully overturned. Why must we go through such a long process to do the same thing with the discrimination against homosexuals’ right to marriage?
Our law has prided itself on maintaining equality for every individual. We have been battling for years to maintain a proper balance in our society following the slavery and segregation of African-American’s, now we are arriving at a new crossroads. This crossroad is one that is hurting the concept of marriage law. Two people who promise to devote their lives to one another should be able to do so legally, regardless of the sex of their partner. We need to learn from our past mistakes and end this discrimination. We must allow people to marry who they love. In the words of Thomas Stoddard, “government has no legitimate interest in how that love is expressed” (Barnet 552).