Gay Marriage: With Liberty and Justice for All?

Gay Marriage: With Liberty and Justice for All?

At a time where a procedural republic is present, gay marriage is an issue that does not satisfy the ideal of liberty as self-choosing and unencumbered. However, this concern has become one of the most controversial subjects today because it violates the first amendment, which is the right of the people to peaceably assemble. How are homosexuals supposed to assemble for their cause if they are threatened with violence? Homosexuality is the real problem in the eyes of many and anything relating to this topic is immediately cast down. Because homosexuals are a minority, their rights cannot be advocated because their lifestyle is not part of the dominant culture. The government is supposed to bracket morality issues and remain objective on topics like gay marriage, but for some reason this is not happening. Administrations are able to get away with using their religious and moral backgrounds to set certain laws in place, remaining unjust. The issue of gay marriage is not homosexuality in itself but an individual's right to choose whom they want to marry.

Considering that heterosexual marriage is protected by the courts thus demonstrating autonomy, it would make sense that homosexual marriage should be protected under the same premise. In Bowers v. Hardwick, the court ruled, "no connection between family, marriage, or procreation on the one hand and homosexual activity on the other has been demonstrated." What exact connections need to be made in a courtroom so that homosexuals can have the same marital rights as heterosexuals? From a voluntarist perspective, people should have the right to choose their own personal relations regardless of sexual orientation, and should not have to prove similarities between heterosexual marriages.1 We live in a society that is based on our rights to choose ends that satisfy our means as long as we are not physically harming another person. The act of gay marriage is obviously not physically harming anyone and therefore should not be prohibited.

Gay marriage has become the controversial civil rights issue as racism was in the 1960's. According to the first amendment of the Bill of Rights, people have the right to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. If this is true, than why are homosexuals afraid to congregate to elect supporters for their cause and to promote there basic quality of life? They are frightened because there is always a threat that if discovered homosexual, their jobs, apartments, families, and very well-being are threatened. A study of gay, lesbian and bisexual adults showed that 41% reported being a victim of a hate crime after the age of 16. With numbers this high, it seems outlandish for a homosexual to come forward even if it is to protect their fundamental rights as an American citizen.

On the contrary, the arguments against gay marriage all seem to narrow down to an issue of morality. The most prominent claim opposing homosexual marriage is that it threatens the institution of marriage. This seems illogical: threatening marriage by allowing marriage. By only allowing marriage between a heterosexual couple and not a homosexual couple, is an ideal based on a religious standpoint. By enforcing certain religious beliefs of marriage between one man and one woman, the government is absolutely violating the separation