Editorial: Gay is the Way

“Let me get this straight, some people get 2 or 3 marriages and we can’t have even one?!”

For what seems like an effortless issue, there are many complications. Gay marriage is discriminated upon throughout the United States. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) states that the definition of marriage under the U.S Constitution is “a legal union between one man and one woman;” therefore excludes homosexuality. People argue that by the enactment of DOMA, ones human rights are denied. Gay marriage should naturally be viewed as a part of society. The Democratic Ideals provide citizens with their own pursuit of happiness; if gay marriage makes people happy, then they should have a right to live the rest of their lives homosexually. Even though there is controversy throughout the nation within the issue of gay marriage, both legal and religious reasoning provides information as to why it should be legalized.

Rights as a U.S citizen are protected under the U.S constitution. However, acknowledging marriage as being between a man and a woman discriminates a huge section of our human race: homosexuals. People throughout the nation have realized how this statement influences oneself by having their asking of marriage denied because gay marriages are not recognized in certain states. The Goodridge vs. Department of Public Health court case took place in the state of Massachusetts. It recognized how derogatory the legal definition of marriage is towards homosexuals because 14 plaintiffs, who initially filed the lawsuit, stated that by denying their right to marry, Massachusetts was violating their rights under the U.S constitution. Section 1 from the 14th amendment from the Constitution is a great way to explain how defining marriage as between a man a woman goes against human rights. It states that “no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;” therefore by denying people their right to marry, their freedom as a U.S citizen is abused. Gay marriage should be legalized throughout more states because people are starting to realize how ridiculous laws against same-sex couples are. Once the Supreme Court of Massachusetts was provided with the case “Goodridge vs. Department of Public Health,” gay marriage was legalized. The Supreme Court stated that “since marriage brings with it certain material advantages, citizens denied the right to choose to marry are excluded from the full range of human experience and denied full protection of the laws for ones vowed commitment towards an intimate and lasting relationship.” The state of Massachusetts is just a fraction of the United States. If our country stuck to the legal piece of gay marriage, then it would be noted that denying ones right to marry does not abide by our constitution and therefore would be legalized throughout the nation. Per contra, even though legal reasons suggest gay marriage should be legalized, morals regarding religion are factors as to why people overlook the legal aspect.

Taylor is an 18 year old girl; she is very religious. She states that “God doesn’t approve of gay marriage;” therefore she doesn’t either. She is one out of the many to take things written within the bible literally, or does she? Taylor believes she is a follower of God. People live accordingly towards a “god-given” perception on how people are supposed to act. However, according to Bishop Robinson, the bible states that “If you want to be a follower of mine, you must give up all of your possessions.” Meaning to be a follower of god, one must give up everything they own. In order to have god’s acceptance, people believe that homosexuality is out of the question; it’s immoral (according to Jeff Badillo). However, from a literal point of view, shouldn’t owning property looked down upon as well? “My Spouse Struggles with Homosexuality,” just by looking at that, what do those 5 words suggest? “My Spouse:” we can create the assumption of a heterosexual marriage; “Struggles with Homosexuality:” either the husband or wife within the heterosexual marriage struggles with homosexuality, but does not believe in it which therefore they try to “fix” oneself by engaging in a heterosexual relationship. The story beneath the headline of “My Spouse Struggles with Homosexuality,” is about a very religious man and woman who get married. Later in their marriage, the wife had concerns about her husband’s sexuality because “signs from god” had been distributed to her; when her husband was caught in a gay bar, the signs were declared true; she then freaked out. There are many people following the bible throughout the United States, and most do not feel the same way about the bible. Even though people abide by the same religious values, different perceptions regarding the bible, such as requirements associated by god, can be perceived in different ways.

“One cannot take the bible literally” says Bishop Robinson, “Once we know what was meant by the author and what was heard by the people for whom it was written, we can ask the question, “Is this eternally binding or something culturally determined that applies only for that time?”. The bible was created a number of years ago and times have changed. How many people have given up ALL of their possessions to be known as a follower of god? When reading the bible, a method called “selective reading” is acted upon.  This means only parts of the bible are comprehended and other parts are overlooked. Jeff Badillo describes homosexual marriage as “not intended by god” and if one were to be gaily married, then they would be “living in sin.” Badillo is a well practiced Christian with a practical perception. He says that he believes that homosexual marriage goes against his moral beliefs and is not a god-given natural right; however, it is ones civil right to marry accordingly and he wouldn’t prevent it from happening because it doesn’t affect him; he’s right. Gay marriage does not affect Jeff Badillo nor any person throughout the United States other than the ones who are involved with the relationship. So why is gay marriage such a big issue? Morals override realistic principles, but they shouldn’t.

Gay marriage should be seen as a natural way of living. The reason why it is an issue is because people don’t consider civil rights listed under the U.S Constitution; instead the legal aspect associated with gay marriage is overlooked. One’s morals cannot determine society; it would be unethical. Religion suggests that marriage should be between a man and a woman, however, over time, marriage has evolved into something more than that. Marriage is a way of living. It is a way for people to display their affection for the person they love and to live the rest of their lives in a blissful manner. One’s sexuality is a factor of a person’s identity, it isn’t their complete identity. We are different from one another and the differences create who we are as beings. Amongst these differences, we still have one thing in common: we are all citizens abiding by the U.S Constitution; therefore meaning we have equal rights; therefore initiates the fact that gay marriage should be legalized throughout the United States.

Stakeholders

Anti

     Focus on the People is an anti-gay website. It provides information from a Christians views of why/how gay marriage is bad. Most of the time people do not accept homosexuals because they are strong followers of god.

"It was a big shock when my dad came out to me. I started crying. I didn't say anything. I tried to brush it away, but I knew what it meant. I knew it wasn't something approved of … that God didn't approve of it. I wanted it to all go away. I love my dad, no doubt; however, I get worried that the same thing that happened to my mom might also happen to me." -- Taylor, age 18

     Taylor is a strong believer of god. She says "God didn't approve of it" which therefore means she is against homosexuals in general. Religion has a major impact on the outlook people have towards how life is supposed  to be lived; especially towards homosexuals and their marriage. If some Christians don't accept homosexuals because the bible tells them that that's not the natural way of living, then they also abide by the stated definition of the bible of how marriage is the union man and a woman. A story provided by the website, Focus on the People, called "My Spouse Struggles with Homosexuality" is about a man and a woman who both strongly follow the bible; they fell in love and got married. When a few years passed and they had a 7 year old child, the woman became concerned with her husband because she had been receiving "signs from god" stating that her husband is a homosexual; when he was seen at a gay bar, the signs she was receiving had become true. Just as stated before, religious values have a strong impact on the way homosexuals are viewed. By initially looking at the title, "My Spouse Struggles with Homosexuality," creates the assumption that either a man or a woman is a religious follower and figured out they're homosexual; therefore leads them to think that there's something wrong with them and the way to fix it is by becoming heterosexually married. However, within the near future the man or woman's homosexuality is revealed because that's how they wanted to initially live their life.


Click on the bold and highlighted "My Spouse Struggles with Homosexuality" for a link to the page

Pro

     Even though the outlook of the bible tells Christians gay marriage is frowned, an interview by Andy Eddins to Bishop Robinson suggests that one can't take the text written within the bible literally. Robinson says that "Even if you are only trying to deal with the words as they are written, even your choice of which words you are going to deal with—which passages—requires interpretation." This means that your interpretation of the bible can not be taken literally.  Within the verse of Luke of the bible, it states that “If you want to be a follower of mine, you must give up all of your possessions.” Nobody abides by this recommendation of the bible. When people read the bible, they do "selective reading" meaning they only intake certain information. The Bishop creates a comparison between baseball and the bible demonstrating that unless one knows the game of baseball, one can only assume what "out in left field" really means. He says that the Old Testament section of the bible  was created by cultures that wanted to get rid of the Jews; " Much of what we read in the Old Testament is about this struggle with those cultures. We now know a lot more about those struggles and the culture, and therefore, in some sense, we know the game of baseball they were playing. We have a context in which to sort through those words." 

     "Once we know what was meant by the author and what was heard by the people for whom it was written, we can ask the question, “Is this eternally binding or something culturally determined that applies only for that time?” There are steps involved to determining how things within the bible should be interpreted; without this process, one would have no way of knowing because one would be taking two sides of the argument; what was said in the past, doesn't always apply to the future. "Some of the other things that we read in scripture have to be taken in context, and we have to say, maybe then but not now." 

Click on the bold and highlighted "Bishop Robinson" for a link to the interview page

My Interview

    I am apart of the Catholic religion. Throughout the nation, it is hard to predict which Catholics are against or for gay marriage because people perceive the information provided within the bible differently. For my interview, I interviewed my religion teacher, Jeff Badillo, to get his opinion of the churches ruling and his own views on gay marriage. He says that the church acknowledges gay marriage as being an unnatural right, however, it is ones civil right to become homosexually married; it can be viewed as a life in sin, however gays are NOT discriminated upon by god. He describes homosexuality as being not intended by god and is immoral regarding the bible, but there are no "laws" against it. I asked, "Do you agree with the churches views? How do you feel?" He came back with the response acknowledging that gay marriage should be legalized throughout the United States. Even though he believes that homosexual marriage is morally wrong, he wouldn't prevent it from happening because it doestn' affect him. Badillo finished his answer with describing himself as a "Social Libertarian."
     The hardest thing that that I had to overcome throughout the whole interview process was making questions to ask my interviewee because I had no idea which side of gay marriage he was supporting.When it was time for me to talk to my teacher after religion class, I was jittery, but once the conversation between him and I got started, I got more comfortable. I learned that he had the same perception as me upon gay marriage, for the most part, and he was very easy to talk. The only difficult thing that I encountered throughout the interview itself was taking notes. Sometimes I got very into the conversation and forgot to jot some of the important information down on paper. However, he was there to help me and was easy-going when I had to ask him to repeat some of the information because I had missed it. Furthermore, the interview was very informative and it was beneficial towards my project by providing me with a different view towards the issue of gay marriage.

Panel Day Reflection

     From my viewpoint, I thought that the Panel Day presentation was an alright event. To put things in perspective, people can have many different views regarding one general topic. For example: I am religious, but I do not abide by the same religious stand points as Mary Anne Hegemen (the Mormon Panelist). She does not believe in gay marriage. Her views consist of a moral aspect, which for her, includes God and the Bible. Gay marriage is not particularly excepted by God, which therefore means she is against homosexual marriage. My morality is not the same as hers; my morals go in the direction of the other two panelists we heard from: David Zuckeman (former representative) and Tom Little (former legislator). They led me to believe that they are both pro gay marriage.  The panelists that came to talk about Gay Marriage, whether it was through their beliefs or governmental standpoints, made me to think deeper about what the nation would become if laws, factoring discrimination amongst homosexuals, are abolished or added to the U.S constitution. They gave me the perspective that whether gay marriage is allowed or not, there will still be issues regarding it because people are either for it, or against it, and if gay marriage; if gay marriage is allowed then there will be further questions such as "if gay marriage is allowed, then why isn't (such and such)," however if gay marriage isn't allowed then that will be discriminating amongst homosexuals. All in all I feel like the Panel Day experience was a good experience and gave me a new stand point of the issue of gay marriage.

Interviews

I am going to interview Jeff Badillo (my religion teacher) on Sunday.
Email: Jeffrey.Badillo@gmail.com

Court Cases

Goodridge vs. Department of Public Health
      Initially, 14 plaintiffs in the state of Massachusetts went to go get their marriage license but were denied their right to marry because they are same sex couple (Massachusetts does NOT recognize same sex marriages). The couples then filed a law suit complaining the state of Massachusetts are violating their rights under the US constitution by denying their request to become married. The case then went to the Massachusetts Supreme Court and there was a 4-3 ruling stating that "since marriage brings with it certain material advantages, citizens denied the right to choose to marry are excluded form the full range of human experience and denied full protection of the laws for ones vowed commitment towards an intimate and lasting relationship." The effects to this ruling can provide a positive and negative outcome. Gays are happy because they now get the same rights as heterosexual couples, however, the anti-gay marriage group of people can become upset because the ruling does not abide by what they morally believe in.

Proposition 8
     There are two sides for every case.

    "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in the state of California." Initially, California was an "Anti Gay Marriage" state but then because a "Pro Gay Marriage," and now is looking to go back to an "Anti Gay Marriage state; Proposition 8 is making this happen. The California Supreme Court voted with a 6:1 ratio to advocate Proposition 8 in the State of California. The impact on society could result in gay couples filing law suits because they would call it discrimination to deny the same rights to homosexual couples as they would to heterosexual couples. However, other people may have a different outlook on the situation because the ruling follows their morals &/ religious beliefs.

Constitutional Connection

     Under section 1 of the 14th Amendment from the US Constitution, it states that "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United states; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This means that equal rights are distributed throughout every one being of the United States. However, many states do not allow same-sex marriages which is discrimination amongst homosexuals, therefore meaning that they do not abide by the Constitution. Per contra, each state with laws &/ amendments prohibiting gay marriage should ethically be taken away, but it's not that easy. There are many controversial issues, for example: religion and morals, that influence the issue negatively by providing a disapproving opinion. Under the Defense of Marriage Act, marriage is defined as " a legal union between one man and one woman for purposes of all federal laws, and provides that states need not recognize a marriage from another state if it is between persons of the same sex" (DOMA). This was initially an act under the Federal Constitution meaning that every state abides by this ruling. President Barack Obama realized that this act is unconstitutional, but he can't do anything about it because in order for this case to get passed, the issue has to go through the Supreme Court. This is where section 1 in the 14th Amendment becomes crucial because people who are pro gay marriage want to persuade the Supreme Court to give homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals. They bring up that it is discrimination to not allow the same rights and therefore goes against the constitution; therefore states that saying "no to gay marriage" should be listed as unconstitutional.