Same Sex Marriage

Same Sex Marriage

Introduction

Marriages do not only enrich the living of the couple but it is also the mode of enriching society. It is a fact that same sex marriages are surrounded by much controversy involving legal and societal arguments, in which some oppose it while some support it. Legal or Official arguments are the subject of fundamental civil and equal rights, that is why they support same sex marriages which obtains more attention. In contrast, same sex marriages also face opposition by social arguments for the reason that they care for the welfare of the society by maintaining the ethics and morals. The paper is designed to show equal rights for same sex marriages under the examination of health, public and other opinions of the society.

Discussion Analysis

It has been observed that the single or bachelor heterosexual partners, having the option of being officially married, get pleasure from the rights provided to the legally accepted marriages but no such opportunity is given to the same sex couples. Every time, when same sex marriage issues are discussed, there is one argue that usually arises that this relationship is not normal and natural as children could not be produced by their union (Newton, 2012). Good ridge v. Dept. of Public Health was a turning point court appeal case that dealt with same-sex marriage under the boundaries of Massachusetts. US high court was the first yard where the decision came in front about the right to marry of same sex couples on November 18, 2003.

Lesbian and Gay Defenders and Advocates sued the Massachusetts Department of Health in Superior Court on behalf of 7 same-sex couples, who had been denied marriage licenses in March and April 2001and all were the residents of Massachusetts. The responsibilities of the department included policy making under which town and city's clerks can issue marriage licenses. As a result on May 7, 2002, the judge of Superior Court ruled in Department's favor and the appeal of plaintiffs straightly went into the Supreme Judicial Court. It was argued by Tom Reilly, the Attorney General of Massachusetts that the Court should postpone the judgment of Legislature for the widened public interest and also understand the mingling of same sex couples cannot accomplish the principle object of the marriage.

On November 18, 2003 the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts found that the country cannot refuse the benefits, protections and obligations granted by civil marriage to same sex people who wish to marry. Margaret Marshall, Chief Justice wrote for the majority people that the constitution of the state asserts the equality and dignity of all individuals. He said that there is no adequate constitutionally reason for refusing matrimony to same-sex couples and the right or marrying cannot me conferred by the state. He said that the State does not have adequate reasons for refusing same sex marriages on the grounds of equal rights and protection. The marriage of same sex is also called as gay marriage, which means the two persons ...