Legalizing Gay Marriage: The New Fight for Equality

Whether or not the U.S. population is ready to accept marriage between two people without the consideration of their gender, same-sex marriage has become a major part of our culture. This country was built on the foundations of equality, but yet again her we are, as a nation, denying equal rights to another sub-culture, the homosexuals. The acceptance of gay marriage is denied in most states based upon several factors that are joining to create a blurred line between religion and the government, thus generating a struggle on deciding who shall and who shall not be married. Homosexuality has all of the same significances as heterosexuality mainly that of true love, and these loving couples should not be denied or prohibited from expressing their fondness of one another. All couples according to the fundamentals of this country, freedom and the pursuit of happiness, should be allowed to possess sanctioned marriage because marriage is an indisputable right.

Conservatives and many others argue that gay marriage should not be legal because of the legal and constitutional definition of marriage, and because they do not uphold the traditional image of marriage. The most commonly heard and well-known definition of marriage is, "the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law" (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). The specific definition may establish that marriage is only allowed between men and women, but many definitions have changed over the years. The definition of marriage itself has changed several times in American history already, so why can't the population allow another change to a generic definition? For instance, interracial marriage was illegal in some states until the Supreme Court ruled that those laws were unconstitutional due to the court case of Loving vs. Virginia, in which an interracial couple fought for their rights. The meaning of marriage is not the same as it was centuries ago. First off, people no longer follow the original vows, "till death do us part" and thus the divorce rate is at an all-time high; now marriage till death is only a fifty-fifty percent chance among Americans. Also couples now move in together first and see how it goes before considering marriage. If marriage is not as sacred as it was before, why deny same-sex couples the right to marry? Allowing same-sex marriage does not change anything in opposite-sex marriage. No matter what race, gender, ethnicity, or religious stance partners have, love is a strong bond that few people truly find, so why can't we allow homosexuals who have found this bond to express their love through marriage? If all definitions change over time then who is to say that it is not yet time for the definition of marriage to incorporate a growing population of homosexuals? Whether people wish to believe it or not, gays and lesbians have been a part of history for centuries, but it is only recently that they have felt comfortable enough to be themselves. In history, men and women had to hide their sexuality or face extreme scrutiny, hostility, and opposition, until around the 1970's that is. Domestic partnerships allow homosexuals to live together along with some other newly established rights. If we can give them domestic partnerships, then citing tradition as a defense for withholding the right of marriage from gays and lesbians is then a counterfeit idea based on the breaks from tradition we have already taken for homosexuals.

The fact that homosexual couples cannot procreate is also another argument for non-supporters