In the controversial issue of same sex marriage, there are many different opinions and viewpoints. Mainly, the different sides to this topic are broken into two opposing views; pro same sex marriage and con same sex marriage.
Different Viewpoints:
Pro:
People who are pro same sex marriage have several different arguments. One of these is that same sex couples deserve the same marriage benefits (joint ownership, medical decision making) as man/women relationships. Marriage is not only a social status it is also a legal one. Things such as taxes, joint ownership and insurance. It also affects critical medical decisions. If a same sex partner becomes very ill, the other partner may not be allowed to visit because they are not "family". Pro people also argue that adoption rates would go up if all states allowed same sex married couples to adopt. Since same sex couple can't conceive children on their own, obviously, the desire to adopt would greatly increase. And since there are hundreds of children in this world that need to be adopted, allowing same sex couples to create families of their own would be all for the better.
Con:
People who are con same sex marriage have many viewpoints on this topic. Their most "talked about" argument is that same sex marriage goes against religion. The majority of religions in our nation do not allow same sex coupling. Many feel that asking them to perform same sex marriages would be a sin and that they do not want to be forced to do something that their religion would see as sinful. Another argument is that same sex marriage destroys traditional family values. In their eyes, marriage was created for the conceiving of children and rearing them in the traditional ways.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Panel Day Reflection
The panelist for same sex marriage were Mary Anne Hegemen, a Mormon with an opposing view point, Tom Little, a former Legislate and rep. for Shelburne during the civil union issue, and David Zuckerman, who was a rep. for 14 years in the Vermont House of Representatives.
Tom Little was very responsive to our questions on the legal side of same sex marriage and gay/lesbian rights. He had a very supportive legal view point and shared with us why, legally, not allowing same sex marriage was wrong. I don't know what his personal viewpoint is (it may have been un-supportive, who knows?) but he defiantly supported same sex marriage through a legal standpoint because he saw no defense against marrying two people who wanted too be with one another.
Mary Anne Hegemen was a tad frustrating. Her view point on the issue was based on the bible. I did not find her personal view point frustrating, I was frustrated by her lake of participation. She did not answer any questions that were about the legal view or any particularly question on same sex marriage. When she did answer questions about either children or family values, her answer was only "god will come and make it right." This doesn't offend me, even though this is not my view. What really bothered me was that she did not explain her answer. She didn't say why this was her view or what it actually meant. This panelist did not help me very much.
I found David Zuckerman very helpful and the most passionate about the topic. He really put his personal input into the discussion. I also really agreed with his personal view. His views on the issue were that...its not not issue. He thinks that there are many more issues in our nation that are much more concerning then same sex marriage, and I agree. He also thinks that our generation is much more tolerant of same sex couples then his ever was. I thinks this is true as well, just from looking at the people around me and observing their views. I really liked that he was respectful but he still made his opinions known.
Tom Little was very responsive to our questions on the legal side of same sex marriage and gay/lesbian rights. He had a very supportive legal view point and shared with us why, legally, not allowing same sex marriage was wrong. I don't know what his personal viewpoint is (it may have been un-supportive, who knows?) but he defiantly supported same sex marriage through a legal standpoint because he saw no defense against marrying two people who wanted too be with one another.
Mary Anne Hegemen was a tad frustrating. Her view point on the issue was based on the bible. I did not find her personal view point frustrating, I was frustrated by her lake of participation. She did not answer any questions that were about the legal view or any particularly question on same sex marriage. When she did answer questions about either children or family values, her answer was only "god will come and make it right." This doesn't offend me, even though this is not my view. What really bothered me was that she did not explain her answer. She didn't say why this was her view or what it actually meant. This panelist did not help me very much.
I found David Zuckerman very helpful and the most passionate about the topic. He really put his personal input into the discussion. I also really agreed with his personal view. His views on the issue were that...its not not issue. He thinks that there are many more issues in our nation that are much more concerning then same sex marriage, and I agree. He also thinks that our generation is much more tolerant of same sex couples then his ever was. I thinks this is true as well, just from looking at the people around me and observing their views. I really liked that he was respectful but he still made his opinions known.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Interview Ideas
1. Methodist Church leader of Shelburne:
Shelburne United Methodist Church
Phone: 802-985-3981
Email: shelburne.umc@myfairpoint.net
2. Gay & Lesbian Fund of Vermont:
Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Allies Vermont Fund.
Address: PO Box 42, Randolph, VT 05060Email: info@glfundvt.org
3. Outright Vermont: Vermont's Youth Center and State wide Advocacy
Saben Littlefield: Education and State Wide Field Manager
Email: saben@outrightvt.org
Shelburne United Methodist Church
Phone: 802-985-3981
Email: shelburne.umc@myfairpoint.net
2. Gay & Lesbian Fund of Vermont:
Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Allies Vermont Fund.
Address: PO Box 42, Randolph, VT 05060Email: info@glfundvt.org
3. Outright Vermont: Vermont's Youth Center and State wide Advocacy
Saben Littlefield: Education and State Wide Field Manager
Email: saben@outrightvt.org
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Court Cases
Baker v. Vermont
In 1996 three same sex couples were denied marriage licenses from the towns of Milton, Shelburne and South Burlington. They sued each town, and the state of Vermont, declaring that refusing to give them the marriage licenses was unconstitutional. The towns wanted to dismiss the case stating that the Vermont constitution did not allow same sex marriage and that same sex marriage did not promote "the link between procreation and child rearing". The couples then appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court. The Vermont Supreme Court denied there argument that there rights were being violated according to the Vermont Marriage status because the status defined marriage as between a bride and groom, meaning a man and a women. But, in the end, the Vermont Supreme court unanimously decided that there was a violation of rights granted by the Vermont Constitution. But Instead of a same sex marriage law a civil union law was established.
Goodridge vs. the Department of Public Health
In 2001 the GLAD gay and lesbian organization, sued the Department of Public Health claiming that they had refused to give 6 same sex couple marriage licenses (many of these couples had children). The Massachusetts Supreme Court found in favor of the couple and stated that "the state may not deny the protections, benefits and obligations conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry." By November 18, 2003, same sex couples had the right to marry in the state of Massachusetts.
In 1996 three same sex couples were denied marriage licenses from the towns of Milton, Shelburne and South Burlington. They sued each town, and the state of Vermont, declaring that refusing to give them the marriage licenses was unconstitutional. The towns wanted to dismiss the case stating that the Vermont constitution did not allow same sex marriage and that same sex marriage did not promote "the link between procreation and child rearing". The couples then appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court. The Vermont Supreme Court denied there argument that there rights were being violated according to the Vermont Marriage status because the status defined marriage as between a bride and groom, meaning a man and a women. But, in the end, the Vermont Supreme court unanimously decided that there was a violation of rights granted by the Vermont Constitution. But Instead of a same sex marriage law a civil union law was established.
Goodridge vs. the Department of Public Health
In 2001 the GLAD gay and lesbian organization, sued the Department of Public Health claiming that they had refused to give 6 same sex couple marriage licenses (many of these couples had children). The Massachusetts Supreme Court found in favor of the couple and stated that "the state may not deny the protections, benefits and obligations conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry." By November 18, 2003, same sex couples had the right to marry in the state of Massachusetts.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Current Interpratation
40 states in the U.S. do not allow same sex marriage or civil unions,1 state has a court case pending on the issue, 1 state is undecided between legalizing or not legalizing same sex marriage, 6 states allow same sex marriage and 2 states have no laws for the issue. After California went through the legalization of same sex marriage, proposition 8 took the right away. Now a court case is pending to bring the same sex marriage law back to C.A. In November, 2004, Oregon state voted to pass Measure 36, defining marriage as between a man and a women. This puts the 2,961 same sex married couples in the state of Oregon in a "limbo". New York and Rhode Island have no laws either banning or allowing same sex marriage in their states. Links: http://marriage.about.com/cs/marriagelicenses/a/samesexcomp.htm
Constitutional Connections
In my opinion DOMA is unconstitutional because it denies the people of there constitutional rights and privileges as an American citizen.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Issue Explanation
Same sex marriage is a constitutional issue that has, in recent years become a very hot issue in the USA. Because it is not mentioned in the Constitution, hundreds of American citizens are concerned about their rights. There are several opposing view points to this issue. Many people in the US believe in traditional marriage and families. They are strongly against any questioning of this belief mainly due to religion. Several religions are firmly against gay marriage and refuse to acknowledge it. Also, many people believe the sole purpose of marriage is to produce children.
Gay and lesbian couples views on this issue are also very strong and opinionated. Their argument is that they deserve the equality and rights that every other married couple has in America. And as for the issue of children, many same sex couples either adopt or have artificial insemination done to bring a child into their relationship.
But the issue is not religion or children, it is the fact that many same sex couples that are American citizens do not have the same rights as everyone else does in this nation.
Gay and lesbian couples views on this issue are also very strong and opinionated. Their argument is that they deserve the equality and rights that every other married couple has in America. And as for the issue of children, many same sex couples either adopt or have artificial insemination done to bring a child into their relationship.
But the issue is not religion or children, it is the fact that many same sex couples that are American citizens do not have the same rights as everyone else does in this nation.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Questions and Concerns
1. What is Obama's stand on gay marriage and on DOMA?
2. Is there any progress to reinstating same sex marriage in California?
3. How many states allow civil unions?
4. What is the difference in "divorce" between same sex marriage and civil unions?
5. In the case of "divorce/seperation" in a same sex marriage or civil union, is child custody treated differently?
2. Is there any progress to reinstating same sex marriage in California?
3. How many states allow civil unions?
4. What is the difference in "divorce" between same sex marriage and civil unions?
5. In the case of "divorce/seperation" in a same sex marriage or civil union, is child custody treated differently?
What I Know So Far
What I know, so far, about gay and lesbian rights is what I've learned just by living in Vermont. I know that the gay and lesbian rights is a very sensitive issue in every state in our nation. Very few states allow gay marriage. These states are Iowa, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington D.C. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), presented to congress in 1996, defined marriage as between a man and a women. DOMA also said that if a state does not wish to recognize gay marriage as a legal union, then the states do not have to. I also know that Proposition 8 (or the California Marriage Protection Act) was passed in November 2008. Proposition 8 changed the recognized law, in the state of California, of same sex marriage to "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)