Why is banning gay marriage still an issue in 2013?


As I just finished reading an article about gay marriage, I am now heated.

Hear me out when I say this; it is 2013, why are we still debating about gay marriage rights like we are back in the 1970s?

The new debate going on in government is that President Barak Obama is trying to encourage the Supreme Court to overturn the ban of gay marriage in California.

An article on Yahoo News noted that the Supreme Court will be undergoing the consideration challenging California’s gay marriage ban and overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

What I do not understand is, why are people so passionate about banning gay marriage?

Do same-sex couples, marriages and partners affect all of our lives? Are they harming us, making things bad for us?

I did not think so. Attorney Paul Clement said that “because same-sex relationships cannot naturally produce offspring, they do not implicate the states’s interest in responsible procreation and childrearing in the same way opposite-sex relationships do.”

Now obviously same-sex couples cannot physically procreate.

However, how does that make them inferior to the rest of us who can?

I think that statement is essential to the point that everyone is trying to make; that same-sex couples are not traditional.

What does “traditional” mean anyway? In this day and age, things that were traditional back in the ‘50s, do not work well today.

Women were house mothers, maids, the cooks and cleaners; that is not the way the world works anymore.

I am attending college to attain a great career and support my independent self. That is what the world has come to.

So why can we not just let people live the way they want, gay or straight?

The opponents of gay marriage are beginning to argue that if gay couples were allowed to wed, it would discourage straight couples from getting married.

How can anyone make such a bold statement to say that I would be discouraged to get married just because the “traditional” value of a man and woman getting married has been altered?

I support everyone’s happiness. I do not care what you say California.

The argument then leads to unplanned pregnancies again.

We get that opposite-sex couples can accidentally have a child, but same-sex couples cannot; they adopt or find another way.

The Justice Department made a point counteracting that statement by saying, “Marriage is far more than a societal means of dealing with unintended pregnancies,” and that preventing gay couples from marrying each other is not going to help or hurt the enouragment for straight couples to marry when they have children.

Some people have sex before marriage, it is part of life.

In this “non-traditional” world, as some may say, these things happen and are more common and accepted today.

But why should gay couples not be allowed to have children? Personal trainer Jillian Michaels has two children with her female partner, one adopted little girl and one baby boy.

Michaels adopted her daughter from Haiti and her partner gave birth to the baby boy.

I do not see anyone boycotting Michaels’ exercise tapes because of this.

Children are going to grow up the way they are raised.

Whether they have two mothers, two fathers or one of each, they are going to be loved and be perfectly healthy children if treated correctly.

Not one of these opponents has grown up in a same-sex environment, so how could they possibly spit out facts or give such a biased opinion?


Comments powered by Disqus

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Slate.