In 2001, the Netherlands was the first to call a same-sex nuptial "marriage." Many people refuted the concept of same sex marriage, as it was a complete culture shock and taboo of that time. At this time, no man could have seen such an epidemic to come. From 2001 to 2015, we have gone from a single case in the Netherlands to seventeen states in the U.S allowing some form of same-sex marriage acceptance. Now, homosexuality and LGBT acceptance is a worldwide phenomenon and has been brought to surface and addressed respectively. In today’s society same sex marriage is a concept that is raising extreme controversy and is making it’s way across the country pushing for worldwide recognition. By doing this, the idea of a man marrying a man, or woman
…show more content…
This raises the question of should the marital status of same sex couples be a nationwide law? The constitution of the United States includes no denial of same-sex marriage, but rather only the allowance to each individual’s pursuit of happiness. Across America, the battles of same-sex couples marrying continues. Gay marriage critics also continue to rally behind the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law which defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. So who is right here? Factors regarding religion, the constitution, and the law play into what defines marriage and if that definition should stand today. Gay Marriage is the civil rights battle of our generation, treading closely behind the overcoming of inequality for blacks and women, gays deserve to be afforded the same protection and rights of every United States …show more content…
Yes, gay rights are a prominent issue that deserve attention and respect, but if this goes against the beliefs of certain religious views, which ideology trumps the other? The ideal world would have the capability to equally please both parties, but this is not a perfect world. So where is that line drawn? Professor Mark P. Strasser, Trustees Professor of Law at Capital University Law School holds a strong opinion on this perspective of religious consideration on the issue. In Strasser’s article, published in Journal Of Law & Religion in 2009, he argues how freedom to practice and express religion should trump the standing of same-sex in public services. In layman’s terms, Strasser voices how if people should all be given the right by law to marry who they please, then those who practice religion against homosexuality should also be allowed to act on that belief. For example, since Catholics believe according to the bible that homosexuality is a sin and one is guilty association, and the constitution supports the freedom to practice one’s religion, then shouldn’t Catholics have the right to deny service to those that are homosexual? In general, Strasser believes that allowing nationwide same-sex marriage acceptance will cause more harm that good. With in his articles, Strasser notes how, “these people all believe that nationwide acceptance will be the ‘answers
This raises the question of should the marital status of same sex couples be a nationwide law? The constitution of the United States includes no denial of same-sex marriage, but rather only the allowance to each individual’s pursuit of happiness. Across America, the battles of same-sex couples marrying continues. Gay marriage critics also continue to rally behind the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law which defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. So who is right here? Factors regarding religion, the constitution, and the law play into what defines marriage and if that definition should stand today. Gay Marriage is the civil rights battle of our generation, treading closely behind the overcoming of inequality for blacks and women, gays deserve to be afforded the same protection and rights of every United States …show more content…
Yes, gay rights are a prominent issue that deserve attention and respect, but if this goes against the beliefs of certain religious views, which ideology trumps the other? The ideal world would have the capability to equally please both parties, but this is not a perfect world. So where is that line drawn? Professor Mark P. Strasser, Trustees Professor of Law at Capital University Law School holds a strong opinion on this perspective of religious consideration on the issue. In Strasser’s article, published in Journal Of Law & Religion in 2009, he argues how freedom to practice and express religion should trump the standing of same-sex in public services. In layman’s terms, Strasser voices how if people should all be given the right by law to marry who they please, then those who practice religion against homosexuality should also be allowed to act on that belief. For example, since Catholics believe according to the bible that homosexuality is a sin and one is guilty association, and the constitution supports the freedom to practice one’s religion, then shouldn’t Catholics have the right to deny service to those that are homosexual? In general, Strasser believes that allowing nationwide same-sex marriage acceptance will cause more harm that good. With in his articles, Strasser notes how, “these people all believe that nationwide acceptance will be the ‘answers