While I was reading my U.S. Politics and Government book, chapter 16, Civil Rights, there was a section on equal protection, especially Homosexual Marriage. It is almost impossible in current Korea, which is conservative, but in US, the book says that there are already some states which had made it legal, such as California, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, and New Hampshire. Several months have passed since this book was published, so there might be some more. I was a bit proud to see California, where I lived for one year, to be one of those few states. So the question is, should marriage be limited to heterosexual couples? Personally, I could think of no reason why it should be, but as I read some articles related to that matter, I could understand the problem a bit more, although I approve of Gay Marriage still.
Through this essay, I want to answer the ‘Critical Thinking Questions’ the book provides. Firstly, why are state courts such an important part of the debate on same-sex marriage? In most of the states that have legalized same-sex marriage, it is done by Supreme Court decision. In other word, the state Supreme Court simply decided that banning homosexual marriage is contrary to the fundamental right of equal protection. However, many opponents of the decision argue that same-sex marriage is not an issue for the courts to decide; instead, they contend, it should be decided through the democratic process- ballot, as it was in Vermont and New Hampshire. I read this statement and thought, it does have a point. I understand that homosexual couples can evoke discomfort to some people used to the traditional concepts, and if such people are more than the majority of a society, it should at least be unofficial. Even though state legislations cannot prevent couples from ‘being’ couples- and doing whatever they want as a couple- there is a huge difference between officially approved and not. Public approval almost feels like promotion of same-sex marriage, which might endanger the traditional notion of marriage and the value of the family unit, according to the opponents.
Is this writing for the sake of writing itself, or for a class? In any case your extra writing is always welcomed and WILL count.:)
ReplyDeleteAs for this issue, I am fully in favor or gay marriage and personally feel it is a "non issue." I'm sick of hearing about it and wish the US government would solve real problems instead of wasting time on this stupid issue. The current election bids place far too much emphasis on this, and basically it boils down to Republicans trying to earn votes in certain states by appealing to "popular opinion." Some states are pretty "red neck" (Texas etc.) and probably would vote against gay marriage. Most states (and most people) don't care that much and are fine with it. But the media and political parties won't let it go. Obama, I think, was ready to let it go, but backed down a bit. Ron Paul is more than ready to let it go. Santorum and most other Republicans are using it as a bargaining chip. If Americans want to remain a super power they are going to have to stop wasting time on this kind of thing and start building a better education system and economy that works. That's my opinion. If gay people want to get married and enjoy the same protection and rights as the rest of us, why is it a problem?
Good writing. It's a good debate.
Oh yes, gay marriage a topic that is always in debate :) I've seen this topic used a lot in certain debates and there are very good points on both sides. I agree with Mr. Garrioch, and I personally agree that gay marriage should be permitted in the states.(Well it differs according to states doesn't it? You should also add New York to it, they recently permitted gay marriage). And I definitely do agree with Mr. Garrioch at how parties are wasting their time debating on something so trivial compared to the other crucial problems that are surrounding the American public right now. Well I guess that's the problem of American politics, they are not doing politics for the people, but they are just doing it so that their party will gain the advantage, or that they themselves will have a better chance in the presidential election.
ReplyDelete