The United States of America have always been in a battle over the legitimacy of same-sex marriage in society. According to California Proposition 8 announcement which deemed the ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, the US courts are in a dead end trying to figure out if they should pass the ban as constitutional or unconstitutional. This ban states that gay marriage violates human and civil rights. According to the US Supreme Court, there is an appeal to be made within next ninety days. When the appeal is made, Appeal Courtreviews previous ruling and makes a new one declaring the ban legal or illegal. If the ban was deemed legal, homosexuals would have no right to stand by their same-sex marriage. If the appeal was deemed illegal, than homosexuals would have a right to practice the act of same-sex marriage in American society (Snyder 134).
In my opinion, the case of same-sex marriage is a critical issue, which should be handled with much concern. Before legalizing or banning the act, there are various considerations, which have to be made. First, the court should consider on the sanctity and importance of human life as it was in the beginning. Second, every human being in society has a right to do what he or she feels like doing as long as it is within the law. In this case, the law stands for protecting every individual from being disadvantaged, offended or affected in any negative way by the actions of the others. Since same-sex marriage has been opposed to human ethical beliefs and norms, much consideration should be made before making it legal. In the same time, the rights of individuals who have decided to be a part of or engage in same-sexual marriage should not be denied.
-
0
Preparing Orders
-
0
Active Writers
-
0%
Positive Feedback
-
0
Support Agents
As courts pursue stern and sound decision and settle on a certain ruling for this issue, both sides should be enabled to access equal rights irrespective of the pervious judicial verdict. . Constitution is a tool, which should try and protect every individual with his/her opinions and ideas. But the decisions courts make should focus on interests of the majority. Therefore, I think that the most common opinions and ideologies in society should be protected by the constitution. However, the minority should not be denied any rights arising from the repercussions of the first denial.
I’m deeply concerned about the image of traditional marriage in society if same-sex marriage turns into an everyday occurrence. Since marriage as a social occurrence has emerged and been recognized by law, people have known it to be between two individuals, who have made up their minds and decided to join up and make a family. This has not been an issue even in regard to legislation and legislative acts which precede and proceed after individuals engage in this kind of marriage. This is what the constitution has been backing up for a long time. With the introduction of same-sex marriage, the constitution will be altered in order to cater for individuals who decide to go into this kind of marriage. The society will be forced to adjust and embrace the same-sex marriage even if it counters existing norms and believes in society. Moreover, the older generation would have to renew its beliefs and thoughts as they teach the new generation on how marriage and society should look and work.