The Gay Marriage Debate

[MaryEllen]

There has been a lot of controversy over the last few years on whether gay couples should be allowed to marry. In Massachusettes gay couples do have that right and just this week an Iowa judge overturned that states ban on gay marriage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IOWA JUDGE RULES GAYS CAN MARRY

by: LAMBDALEGAL.com, OIA Newswire

In a significant victory for marriage equality, an Iowa court ruled it is unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. This decision brings to life the Iowa Constitution's promise of equality for same-sex couples and their families.

Nearly two years after six same-sex couples were denied marriage licenses by Polk County Recorder Timothy Brien, an Iowa court ruled that it is unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the right to marry.

This is the first marriage case launched in the American Midwest and shows that fairness and equality for all are valued across our nation. The decision brings to life the Iowa Constitution's promise of equality for same-sex couples and their families.

This case now moves forward, and the Iowa Supreme Court will ultimately have the final decision.

Background:

Lambda Legal filed this lawsuit on behalf of six same-sex couples seeking the right to marry in Iowa. We argue that under the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Iowa Constitution it is unlawful to bar same-sex couples from marrying. The couples in this case have been together between five and more than 17 years. Three of the couples are raising children, others are planning families, and all want the responsibilities of marriage and the protections only marriage can provide.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As this could affect transsexual couples as well as gays, I would be interested in hearing opinions from our members on whether they are for or against same sex marriage.

MaryEllen

[Guest Day / Ducky]

this is my stand Love is Love who as the right to say who we can love and who we cant.

[Zufrieden]

My short answer is: Of course gay marriage should be legalized. All you have to do is look at all the happy gay couples who have finally managed it and say "Why should this be denied them?

One of the precepts of (theoretical) democracy is that the majority should not dictate to the minority. But too often in actual, ostensible democracies the majority is always oppressing the minority. A large homophobic and/or sanctimonious segment of America will do anything to quash gay marriage. The problem is that one segment is vehemently against gay marriage while a larger segment is lukewarm accepting of it.

Questions to think about:

Why does the government "sanctify" marriage anyway?

Could the legal rights embodied in marriage be formalized in some other way?

Does marriage have any meaning today when over 50% end in divorce?

Shouldn't polygamy be allowed then, too?

(American-centric) What if even 49 states legalize it and one doesn't?

What if you move to a country where it isn't acknowledged?

What if you get married as a normal Joe/Jane, then somebody transitions?

I think that if the word "marriage" was stricken from every legal document and replaced by something like "Section 207B arrangement" it would help to defuse this issue. Much confusion is caused by the intermixing of religious marriage and civil acknowledgement of a relationship.

For transsexuals who have been legally acknowledged as their new gender, there is not (as far as I know) any legal problem with marrying somebody of the opposite gender.

More questions to think about:

Why does the government enforce male/female duality?

What if you fully change your gender but don't bother to petition to have it legally changed?

On a personal note, I guess I should be more concerned with this, I'll probably be homosexual someday. No, I'm not changing my sexual orientation, I've always been gynophilic (no, not autogynophilic). I'm also hydrophilic, I like a nice bath!

Z.

[MaryEllen]

UPDATE

gaysocialites.com

[Guest matthew41]

I am for gay marriage for several reasons.

1. I have gay friends who have the problem that only one parent can legally adopt their children. It leaves the door open for extended family to take custody away from the other parent if the legal parent should die.

2. I have friends who have now lost partner benefits because Michigan adopted the anti-gay marriage law, and its caused an undue financial burden to many. The partner benefits where granted in the first place to attract professionals to create successful businesses here.

3. Despite the fact that most transsexuals can legally marry once they change the gender marker on their birth certificate getting divorced comes back to haunt them. Many judges then see the marriage as never legal in the first place, calling it a same sex marriage. More often then not, the non trans partner end up with practically anything they want, including the children.

4. When already married and one spouse transitions, they are not required to divorce. But later in life when the non trans spouse applies for SS spousal benefits, its purely on a case by case bases if they are granted those benefits.

[Guest buttercup]

I agree in same sex marriages and all the entitlements that come with it.

[Guest SkyDancer]

I believe that there is nothing wrong with gay marriages. If someone is happy and truly loves someone of the same sex, then nothing should change that. If someone tries to prevent them from persuing their true feelings, then they are preventing them the right to persue happiness. Which was one of the three goals put done when the American government was created, "life, liberty, and the persuet of happiness"

One thing does trouble me though. If marriage has to do with the church, then shouldn't it not be decided by the government since a law was passed seperating religion and government. Though I guess since this is a major issue, the government had to take action, but wasn't it ounce put done that if the church denies what you believe, then you have the right to go and form your own church as long as it doesn't turn into a "cult" (though that depends on your opinion of what a cult is). To me I would think church formed to allow gay marriage would be legal.

Though, and I don't mean to be offensive to any one, but if two people truly love each other, does it really matter what the church and/or government thinks. Yes, I know it is tradition to be married by a church or priest or something to the equivilent, but does it really matter if you have the church's blessing or not? Again I apologize for those that are very religious or equivilent thought process.

[Guest Jenny]

In todays day and age it doesn't really matter anymore, civil unions are just as viable and really what does it boil down to, your love. The piece of paper really is the same whether done by a priest or a judge.

[Guest elenag]

One thing does trouble me though. If marriage has to do with the church, then shouldn't it not be decided by the government since a law was passed seperating religion and government. Though I guess since this is a major issue, the government had to take action, but wasn't it ounce put done that if the church denies what you believe, then you have the right to go and form your own church as long as it doesn't turn into a "cult" (though that depends on your opinion of what a cult is). To me I would think church formed to allow gay marriage would be legal.

A marriage is a legal contract and thus requires government regulation and oversight. Also, marriage influences inheritance and custodianship rights, so there are extremely strong reasons for government management of marriage.

I understand your point about separation of church and state but I don't believe that tact is a good one to take. It buys into the assumption that Christian churches invented and own the concept of marriage. They certainly do not define marriage, even though many vocal anti-gay marriage proponents believe so. Since many religions and atheists share the concept of marriage, it is not controlled by one particular religion. I am annoyed that our government (USA) demonstrates an obvious preference toward a sub-set of people who want to enforce their religion on me by way of codifying law based on their flavor of Christianity. My religion supports gay marriage, and yet my religion takes a back seat in the land of the "free". My religion has been truncated and restricted by those in the "moral majority". My only response to them is how dare you.

Though, and I don't mean to be offensive to any one, but if two people truly love each other, does it really matter what the church and/or government thinks.

Government, YES. Gay couples cannot marry due to the government, therefore it matters a lot. Church? Only if you're a member of that church. Guess what? I'm not a member of a church that denies freedom to the rest of society. Their doctrine is not my doctrine. I am free to dismiss and ignore the doctrine of a church I am not a member of, despite that church believing otherwise.

[Guest Seren]

Personally i don't like marriage and don't want to ever get married at all.

But afaic anyone can do whatever they like as long as it doesn't affect me in a negative way so i say if you want to: go for it.

[Guest Sheila]

i don't think the government should have any say about us marrying someone of the same sex. don't they have more important issues to deal with. it's a sad state of affair's when the government (dictatorship) sticks it's nose into our lovelife. uncle sam really gets my goat sometimes ! i know this is an old post but feeling strongly about this issue i wanted to express my thoughts on the matter. i am for same sex marrage all the way !!!

girl power,

sheila

[Guest Seth]

Gay couples should have the right to marry, same as straight couples.

[Guest Just_Call_Me_Nick]

When my life partner ever goes into an intensive care (knock on wood it doesn't happen) I want to be able to legally go see her....and not thrown out because I am not immediate family....

So yes I vote for same sex marriage!

Nick~

[Guest Lee]

Even though I don't want to ever get married, I still believe that same sex couples should have the right to get married. Why should same sex couples be denied the rights that straight couples are guaranteed?

[blackkatsen]

I personally don't really like gay marriage. The whole term seems to be a oxymoron to me because marriage is between a man and a woman. It always has. It's just being challenged now. Sorry, but I would have to vote no on it.

[Guest StrandedOutThere]

When my life partner ever goes into an intensive care (knock on wood it doesn't happen) I want to be able to legally go see her....and not thrown out because I am not immediate family....

So yes I vote for same sex marriage!

Nick~

Indeed! You speak the truth!

There was a situation where I had to go to the emergency room for something and the hospital staff wouldn't let my girlfriend at the time come back with me to to the exam room. I was scared to death and really didn't want to be alone. She ended up going into a bathroom that shared a wall with the exam room and knocking a rhythm that I'd recognize on the wall, just to let me know she was there. It didn't matter how much I said I wanted her to come in with me, the stupid hospital staff wouldn't let her in.

I am outraged that marriage rights are not extended to all couples. Grrrrrrrrrrrr!!

[Guest StrandedOutThere]

I personally don't really like gay marriage. The whole term seems to be a oxymoron to me because marriage is between a man and a woman. It always has. It's just being challenged now. Sorry, but I would have to vote no on it.

Dude, you are entitled to your opinion, but I would have to disagree. Are you also against civil unions that would carry the same rights and privileges as marriage? The idea isn't necessarily about "marriage" per se. It's about how there are families suffer because the heads of the household happen to be of the same sex. Imagine that the person you love and have loved for the past 10 years, who you have adopted children with...suddenly gets sick or is in an accident. If you aren't married to them, you can't go see them in the ICU. If one of you dies, there can be problems with managing your estate or determining custody of children. It's a mess!

I guess what I'm saying is that I think legally recognized marriage is a right, not the privilege it is being presented as now. The church is welcome to its man/woman version. What I'm talking about is legal, government sanctioned unions.

Don't get me started on the "separate but equal" stuff... We've all heard that argument before...and it stinks as much now as it did then.

Sorry...don't mean to flame you. The defense rests.

[Guest Leah1026]

I personally don't really like gay marriage. The whole term seems to be a oxymoron to me because marriage is between a man and a woman. It always has. It's just being challenged now. Sorry, but I would have to vote no on it.

You are being short sighgted. You do realize that as someone born transsexual you are caught in a Catch 22?

Say you transition MtF and you want to marry a guy. Some may say you can't because YOU ARE A GUY and that's a same sex marriage.

And if you then decide to marry a woman those same people will argue you can't do that because YOU ARE A WOMAN.

You see the problem? It's a huge legal mess that varies state to state and even by county in some places. That's why we need to support MARRIAGE EQUALITY, because it solves most of our legal problems.

Think on that for a bit........

[Guest]

Many of those who oppose same sex marriage object on religous grounds and are entititled to their beliefs. However legal marriage is a civil matter and subject to seperation from Church and state. Few seem to get this. When John Kerry ran for President the Catholic church warned politicians that if they backed Civil abortion laws that they would be excommunicated. I was deeply offended that a religion (I am ex-catholic) would dictate to my elected officials what laws to pass. This would be called extorsion and illegal anywhere else. States where marriage laws are overturned as illegal simply write discrimination into the constitution in the form of an amendment. Usually they are almost always led by groups trying to force their religous views on others. Meanwhile GLBT's are held hostage where a simple majority rule decides the human rights of others. This is just plain wrong. It is my belief our founding fathers never intended this. Case in point one of the biggest reasons George Bush got elected was because of the number of anti gay marriage bills in the states. He came out against gay marriage and a homphobic majority elected him. I repsect the rights of all religous groups but they ought to keep it in church not in my government. In today's world there are a lot of countries you can point to who insert religion into government. The results are disasterous and often lead to war and extreme oppression. It's time to focus on the most important rights of all, "Human Rights". All else should be secondary. Look to California where marriage laws were struck down. Religous groups want it on the ballot for the next election for the sole purpose of elcting a homophobe to the highest post in the land. All of this by the way is just my humble opinion. I mean no offense to anyone.

Laura

[Guest KellyGirl]

California just had a similar ruling I'd call it a great step in the right direction but then I'd just be kidding myself. look my apologize to anyone but legal same sex marriage in any one state is great. but it's worthless. it really is. I'm sorry to bring such a bad outlook to the table but the truth is that the supreme court is to right winged to allow this. all this will be undone, it's only a matter of time.

and yes I agree Laura.

[blackkatsen]

Yes, I also disapprove gay civil unions. It's just a different name, but in reality it is the same thing. Minus the oxymoron.

I know most of this is from how I've been raised, but I still see no reason to really challenge it. Gays have been shunned for thousands of years. I think it is perfectly right for gays to receive all rights everyone else has, but marriage is between a man and a woman. For the past 6,000 years this has worked. You can't deny that. Marriage has a family orientation. It is hard for gays to have children. They can adopt, but that's about it. Adoption is a good thing, but it just doesn't seem right to have two dads or two moms. There is a difference between the two genders and I think it makes an impact when both genders are present raising the children.

I'm not trying to drag religion into this. I think there have been very few if any cultures in history to fully accept gays until recently.

I also don't want to offend anyone, I just think this is a change in something great that has been preserved for thousands of years. Marriage is one of the few commonplace things to survive from that time. And this change would ruin a large part of what it was originally intended to be.

[Guest]

People cannot choose who they are naturally attracted to. Attraction is set very early in life and most know what they are drawn to as their earliest memories just as Transsexuals know what they are as their first memory at 4 or 5 years of age. These are strong indications it's something we are born with. We are what we are. How is this a moral dilemna? Who are we to tell someone who they should be attracted to or whom they should love or what gender they have to live as? Of all the people to understand that we as transgendered should. Do those who were born hetrosexual have MORE rights or more morals than someone who was not? Why? Being the majority gives no one the right to discriminate. You say they should have the same rights as everyone else except for marriage. Why because they were born different? Who is qualified to say whom you can love or who you should marry?

I think it is perfectly right for gays to receive all rights everyone else has, but marriage is between a man and a woman. For the past 6,000 years this has worked. You can't deny that.

A 50% divorce rate doesn't sound like it works to me. Can gays or lesbians do any worse? Some people have been divorced multiple times.

It is hard for gays to have children. They can adopt, but that's about it. Adoption is a good thing, but it just doesn't seem right to have two dads or two moms.

The same people fighting against gay marriage are fighting against gay and transgender adoption. Studies of gay and lesbian families have shown that children were no worse off then hetrosexual families.

This article shows the rights that Gays and lesbians are not getting because they were not born hetrosexual http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/lgbt/civil-marriage.htm . Ones birth should not determine which rights they get under the law or it is discriminatory. So we say "oh you're not like us so you don't get the same rights we do".

Both religious and civil marriages have one thing in common. They both require a civil marriage license to be considered legal. Certainly each church can determine who can be married according to their beliefs religously. They do not however have the right to determine who can and cannot get a civil marriage license under the law of the land. THat's discrimination. Under the law each person should have the right to do the same things you can do. If churches wish to bash gays in their churches from the pulpit that is their issue. However when they do it outside of their juristiction it is hate speech, out of place and discriminatory. Their is a reason our founding fathers wrote that their be seperation from Church And State into our civil laws. It is exactly for reasons such as this. Churches cannot impose their beliefs on others. Neither can they dictate the law to the rest of us. Religious marriage and civil marriage are not the same thing. Without the state marriage would not be legal for anyone. Unfortunately some people are trying to make both types of marriage one and the same. No one has the legal right to do that. Last time I checked the law applies to all of us not just the ones born in the majority.

I do respect your right to believe what you do. Certainly i don't expect to change your mind with this post. Please respect mine and others to have the same law apply to ALL of us not the privledged few. Human beings should all have the same "civil" rights regardless of beliefs. It's not only right, it is only fair. Discrimination should never be written into the constitution. Never!

Laura

[Guest StrandedOutThere]

Hi there again! I must say that I appreciate that you are willing to express a dissenting opinion here. It is really making me think through my own beliefs. Yeah, so I have a little to say in response to your last post.

I know most of this is from how I've been raised, but I still see no reason to really challenge it. Gays have been shunned for thousands of years. I think it is perfectly right for gays to receive all rights everyone else has, but marriage is between a man and a woman. For the past 6,000 years this has worked. You can't deny that. Marriage has a family orientation. It is hard for gays to have children. They can adopt, but that's about it. Adoption is a good thing, but it just doesn't seem right to have two dads or two moms. There is a difference between the two genders and I think it makes an impact when both genders are present raising the children.

Okay, so first thing. I think Laura touched on this too. The problem with saying that it is right for gay people to have the same rights as everyone else, minus marriage is that a lot of the rights that others enjoy also rely on being able to marry. For example, passing on my possessions and property to my partner. If I am with someone of the same sex, there can be a problem with that. Suppose I have a lot of money, I write a will saying that my partner gets everything, then I die. My family could contest the will and, under some circumstances, have a good chance of winning. That's not cool. Also, I brought up the medical decisions thing in my other post. The list goes on. Imagine for a second that the issue here was whether African-Americans or some other ethnic group was being denied marriage rights. If that were the case, I imagine you'd be outraged. This is just as unfair. People are being discriminated against for something that they can't do anything about, they were born that way. I can't change the color of my skin. I can't change my sexual orientation...it's hard wired in my hyperactive, little brain.

On the issue of children, as Laura mentioned, there is no evidence that children raised by gay parents are any worse off than children raised in families with heterosexual parents. In fact, I think I have even seen one study where children raised in families with two gay parents are a little better off than those raised by a single, heterosexual parent. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly confident. Anyway, I have access to the actual articles. If you want to see them, email me and I'd be happy to send you the primary source info. These are large scale scientific studies we are talking about here...with thousands of people in them. To me, this is strong evidence. If it were just word of mouth and anecdotal evidence we were talking about here, I'd be as incredulous as you. However, in my mind, science is the closest thing we have to ultimate truth. I hold it in high regard.

Ah, yes...same sex couples can't have their own kids. They do have to adopt or seek other alternatives. On this issue, I'm all for what's good for the kids. Since I believe that gay parents are as good as heterosexual parents, I think that the more kids that that go to loving homes, the better. If more gay people adopt, more kids get to have homes, and everyone is better off. A lot of children up for adoption have special needs. All kids, especially those with special needs, are far better off in a stable home than in the foster care system.

Also, citing historical precedent isn't a good argument here. Saying that gay people having been shunned for years is a valid reason to not allow them marriage rights. There are lots of things that have been done for thousands of years that might have been accepted by mainstream culture in the past, but are not seen as acceptable now. For example, slavery comes to mind. It's a pretty old practice, but I challenge you to find someone to publically defend it now. See? Cultural changes are often more good than bad.

I'm not trying to drag religion into this. I think there have been very few if any cultures in history to fully accept gays until recently.

I also don't want to offend anyone, I just think this is a change in something great that has been preserved for thousands of years. Marriage is one of the few commonplace things to survive from that time. And this change would ruin a large part of what it was originally intended to be.

Maybe you don't want to drag religion into this, but it's already hopelessly interwoven into this debate. The only reason that marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman is because it is laid out that way in the bible. There is a lot of other stuff in the bible...right next to the "don't be gay" passages...that make no sense. I don't see why people latch on to this one part of the bible so much but so readily dismiss other parts. The fact of the matter is that the founders of our country meant for church and state to be separate. We have a lot of different "churches" in this country, all with different beliefs. When laws are made, they should be made for the greater good. If they are changed, they should be changed for the greater good. Right now it seems like we are moving away from this idea. Instead of looking at the hard facts, we are letting a religion (one that many in the US don't share) form the basis for legislation that affects everyone. I, for one, don't think that's such a good idea.

Okay, I've said my piece. I just couldn't be silent. As an educator, I feel the need to educate. Still, you are totally entitled to your opinion. Thanks again for sharing it.

[Guest StrandedOutThere]

Laura, you rock...plain and simple.

[blackkatsen]

I don't see any real point in starting a war here. All of you have it ingrained into your minds that you wish to change marriage. My conservative roots disagree and could fight for hours, but I don't think it could change your opinions. I also enjoy reading your posts because they are interesting and allow me to think about things. I still have not seen anything strong enough to shake the conservativeness out of me. I guess you could call it a transsexual stumbling block if you wish. I would challenge you to try and shake the conservativeness, but this isn't really the right thread for that.

Anyway, you know my opinion. I wouldn't call it a dissenting opinion since a lot of other people seem to agree with me.