Same sex marriage: legal, social, and cultural perspectives

Same Sex Marriage

Some of those in support of same-sex marriages and civil unions cite the need for minority groups to enjoy the same civil rights enjoyed by everyone else. To advance their agenda, those in support of such unions liken same-sex marriage prohibitions to the retrogressive laws that prohibited interracial marriages. Further, according to Newton, one of the arguments advanced in support of same-sex marriages and unions is that "the standard criterion for permitting two individuals to marry is whether or not they love each other…" (64). Hence according to this argument, two individuals who love each other should be allowed to marry regardless of their sex.

On the other hand, those against same-sex marriages are of the opinion that "same-sex marriage poses a threat to the traditional family" (Newton, 51). In this case, same-sex marriage critics note that allowing such unions would end up occasioning irreparable damage to marriage as an institution. Further, most of those against same-sex marriages are of the opinion that it is impossible for such unions to fulfill the principle purpose of marriage i.e. procreation.

It is important to note that at the federal level, same-sex marriages as well as civil unions are not recognized. However, a number of states have in the past extended some rights to same-sex relationships. States that permit marriages between individuals of the same-sex include Vermont, New York, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Iowa and Connecticut. It should be noted that similar laws have sailed through in both Maryland and Washington. However, these laws have not come into effect yet. It is also important to note that in Rhode Island and New Jersey, same-sex marriages which have legally been undertaken in other jurisdictions are recognized. However, there is no facilitation of such unions in these states. The number of states with express restrictions on same-sex marriages currently stands at 31.

Part 2

On average, partnered gays are happier than cohabiting heterosexuals and single gays. However, legally-married heterosexuals may register greater satisfaction with their unions (and hence happiness) than partnered gays. My assertion in this case is founded on the very nature of the relationships highlighted. It can be noted that legally-married heterosexuals have greater stability in their relationships as they do not have to contend with some stereotypes and stigma encountered by partnered gays. On the other hand, partnered gays do enjoy a significant level of emotional and social stability in comparison to cohabiting heterosexuals and single gays. Further, partnered gays in some cases also have access to some economic benefits not enjoyed by either single gays or cohabiting heterosexuals. This grants them both emotional and social stability. Economic benefits in this case could include but are not limited to the right to file income tax returns jointly and the right to inherit property as well as access the various Social Security benefits incase one spouse passes away.