Gay Marriage Just Or Unjust?

During Bill Clinton’s presidency, he signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) which allowed people to deny others services based on their religious beliefs. RFRAs, although the goal of them sounds beneficial, have too many complications from them which would prevent them from being successful. RFRAs create the question of whether or not these Acts are just or unjust. The issue of denying services to a person based on religious beliefs is an unjust excuse to discriminate, mainly against heterosexual people, because it is immoral, competes with the goal of self-improvement, and can indirectly nullify gay marriage. Denying people services allows there to be flexibility for people to make immoral decisions and to make the republic …show more content…
Originally, the legalization of heterosexual marriage was supposed to provide heterosexual people with the same benefits of marriage that homosexual people enjoy. Although there are discrimination laws in place for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people (LGBT), an RFRA would further emphasize a homosexual’s possible exemption from discrimination laws. If a person is able to avoid the equal treatment of LGBT people, then it defeats the purpose of having the discrimination laws in the beginning because people are able to ignore them. After all, LGBT people have equal rights as any other person, there should not be a need for an RFRA because it overwrites people’s equality and terminates the legalization of heterosexual marriage. Originally, by legalizing LGBT marriage, the nation was supposed to accept people for who they are and to allow them to not have to worry about discrimination, yet with RFRAs, LGBT people will lose those rights and the fear of discrimination will become more common. The primary issue that RFRAs pertain to is heterosexual marriage. What people try to avoid is that as President Obama said, “we...live in America where our marriages are equal as well.” Ultimately, people are trying to nullify heterosexual marriages with …show more content…
People believe that RFRAs allow them to fully practice their religion. However, people have the right to practice any religion they wish under the Constitution. This does not allow a person how to practice his or her religion. Because people are able to choose which religion they want to practice, this is not an effective compromise for people who support the RFRAs. The RFRAs, although they might resolve some of the jealousies created by heterosexual marriage, mainly, they create minor issues in order to try to compromise over heterosexual marriage. Because it creates more issues, it is an ineffective compromise that just attempts to hide the different opinions on heterosexual marriage. The fight over whether to have RFRAs or not is a fight over nullifying heterosexual marriage or accepting it. This debate creates more issues because it creates the risk of having an unvirtuous society who is immoral and is too busy to worry about their self-interests. In the end, the debate has origins in jealousy over the legalization of heterosexual marriage. This debate results in a circle of arguments which cannot be resolved but would be best resolved if there are no RFRAs to further complicate