Same Sex Marriage Should Be Legalized The issue of legalizing same-sex marriages has been the subject of major debate for several years, and was recently brought to the forefront during this past election year. Aside from public support, there are many in the academic world, such as scholars, lawmakers, and commentators who believe that legal status and benefits of marriage should be extended to unions other than traditional marriages (Wardle Pp). There is actually no logical reason why unions of same-sex couples should not be granted.

Throughout the election campaign, President Bush courted conservatives by promising to push for a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriages, and now that he has been re-elected, it is believed that he will definitely push for the amendment (Munro Pp). Karl Rove, senior adviser, said, "Without the protection of that amendment, we are at the mercy of activist federal judges or activist state judges who could determine, as the Massachusetts Supreme Court did, that marriage no longer consists of a union between a man and a woman" (Munro Pp). Earlier this year the amendment failed in both the House and the Senate, and opinion polls indicate that Americans are evenly split on the question of adding a marriage amendment to the Constitution, although on November 2, voters in eleven states passed state amendments banning same-sex marriages (Munro Pp).

President Bush has stated that he believes "marriage is between a man and a woman, and I believe we ought to codify that one way or the other" (Gomes Pp). Yet within United States history, the concept of marriage has evolved in two other ways:

"women, traditionally considered the property of their husbands, eventually became full persons in the eyes of the law and gained the right to own property

themselves; and antimiscegenation laws,

which had prohibited or refused to recognize interracial marriages, were struck down" (Gomes Pp).

What has remained constant, until now, is the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, however, at least...

Recent census data reveals that the number of committed same-sex couple in the United States continues to rise, as does the number of same-sex couples raising children (Gomes Pp). It is important to legally recognize these relationships in order to protect the emotional and economic well-being of these families, and moreover, legal recognition "must be on an equal plane with heterosexual marriage -- separate but equal is never equal" (Gomes Pp).
It is safe to say that at some point in their lives, most people want to share their fortunes and misfortunes with someone whom they have formed lasting bonds (Gomes Pp). They want to provide emotional stability and economic security for their partner and loved ones, and more importantly, they want to know that their loved one's securities are protected by law (Gomes Pp). Same-sex couples are no different than heterosexuals, they want the best for their families (Gomes Pp).

It is estimated that approximately thirty-four percent of lesbian and twenty-two percent of gay male couples are raising children under the age of eighteen (Gomes Pp). One may argue that since these couples are presenting themselves to the world as married without state recognition, then why change the law to allow them true marital status (Gomes Pp). The answer is that the appearance of marriage is only a shadow of the actual privilege and denies the life partner the benefits and protections afforded to a legal spouse, and furthermore, interferes with the best interests of children by "treating gay families differently than nongay families" (Gomes Pp).

All states recognize statutes or common law doctrines granting decision-making powers to relatives when an individual becomes incompetent, and generally looks to a parent or child if the incompetent person is unmarried, and if married, then looks first to the spouse (Gomes Pp). State laws…