Gay Marriage Support in America

Once Again, America is NOT Number One

The United States is no longer leading the way in the march for equal rights for the lesbian, gay, bi and transgendered (LGBT) community. Granted the U.S.A. has several states that offer rights regarding employment, non-discrimination and hate crimes, however even fewer of these states offer equal marriage rights. Over all, the old girl (U.S.A.) is having a difficult time keeping up with Jones' these days.

The week of July 15Th, 2010, Argentina became the first Latin American country to legalize same sex marriage, with all of the rights held therein. Argentina is now among the 'full equal rights for all' nations such as, Canada, South Africa, a few Western Europe nations and the District of Columbia (where the U.S.A. Capitol resides).

Just what is America doing wrong? Well, if we look at the political arena for just a moment we may find some interesting facts. Politicians within the U.S. machine have fallen victim to the few constituents who are steadfastly dedicated to getting some sort of revenge at the polls. Deeply ingrained religious beliefs and a distorted understanding of the LGBT community have played havoc with their fear. This fear breeds a communal response that drives their hate straight to the polls with vigor.

Another fear we see taking its place among the civil rights controversy is that by legalizing same sex marriage those who are in more traditional marriages (straight marriages) feel they will lose a portion of the value placed on those partnerships. This situation has caused for great misunderstanding within the fight for legalized same sex marriage. I have great respect for those who maintain strong, loyal monogamous partnerships within their marriages. Monogamy is also the goal of a same-sex marriage couples as well, rather than the suspected free-for-all that would take place should gay marriage be legalized. Loyalty is just as important to the gay community (possibly more-so) than in mainstream culture.

big•ot\ bi-gêt\ n : one intolerantly devoted to his or her own prejudices or opinions syn fanatic, enthusiast, zealot — big•ot•ed \-gê-têd\ adj — big•ot•ry \-tre\ n

LGBT partnerships are as strong, loyal, and monogamous as any multi-sex partnership. The goal is to find equality in the family bond. If anything, having the responsibility to maintain a committed family environment would seem to be the LGBT goal. To function as its own municipal if you will, as the true design of marriage was meant to do. Let's read about the Creation of the Marriage Municipal:

Marriage was created to provide a minor municipal within a community, that allowed for a head of household and those who reside there in support and compliance of that household, to prosper. This offered a regulated society that freed the government from micro managing every individual within the community and upheld the concept that family owned property belongs with the proper family. It somewhat assured that everyone was taken care of at even the lowest of social standings. In this way the original reason for marriage was assured and thus allowed for the proper conveyance of property from one generation to another.

Interesting to Note that:

• The Anthropological handbook Notes and Queries (1951) defines marriage as "a union between a man and a woman such that children born to that woman are the recognized legitimate offspring of both partners.

• In recognition of a practice by the Nuer of Sudan, allowing women to act as a husband in certain circumstances, Kathleen Gough suggested modifying this to, "a woman and one or more other persons."

The U.S. has a restrictive history when it comes to laws pertaining to marriage. A large number of states within the country had miscegenation laws starting in the late seventeenth century (overturned in Virginia in 1967, via Loving vs. Virginia). These miscegenation laws were primarily found in the slave-holding colonies like Virginia (1691) and Maryland (1692). Many of these slave states did not allow marriages between minorities (of any kind) and the white population.

A STATE-BY-STATE LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF MARRIAGE AND CIVIL RIGHTS

What states banned what minorities from marrying the White population?

• Alabama

Banned Blacks primarily

• Arkansas

Banned Blacks in particular

• Oklahoma

Banned Blacks in particular

• Mississippi

Banned Blacks and Asians

• Missouri

Banned Blacks and Asians

• North Carolina

Banned Blacks and Native Americans

• South Carolina

Banned Blacks and Native Americans

• Georgia

Banned all non-Whites

• Virgina

Banned all non-Whites

It is fairly new that same-sex couples are acquiring the same type of marital recognition as mixed-sex couple. In 1996 the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) clearly and explicitly defined marriage for the purpose of federal law as being between a man and a woman and allows states to ignore same-sex marriages from other states (states were within their legal boundaries to do this anyway). 30 of the 50 United States define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Three of those states have had this on the books since before 1996, pre-dating DOMA and defining marriage as just that. 30 states have statutes prohibiting same sex marriage in their constitutions. As a matter of fact, in 2006 Arizona became the only state that has managed to defeat the constitutional amendment defining marriage between one man and one woman (2008 it subsequently passed one).

Same-sex couples could not legally marry anywhere in the United States until 2004. Today, six states offer complete marital rights to couples while the rest are wavering between civil unions, domestic partnerships, prohibition and full constitutional amendments preventing gay marriage all together. This would seem to indicate that the U.S. is somewhat divided between one extreme and an other. At times redefining marriage takes on a life of its own, by this I mean the debate can become rife with hateful measure and anti-gay sentiments. While at other times the debate is free of debacle all together, resounding with hope and clear expectations of what the near future may bring. In case you are curious about where things stand, below is a run-down on how each state is handling the issue to date.

The legal status, condition, or relationship that results from a contract by which two people, who have the capacity to enter into such an agreement, mutually promise to live together in the relationship of partnership in law for life, or until the legal termination of the relationship.

The marriage is a legally sanctioned contract between two people. Entering into a marriage contract changes the legal status of both parties, giving both parties new rights and obligations. Public policy is strongly in favor of marriage based on the belief that it preserves (all types) of the family unit.

Changes in modern society have modified traditional marriage (one man and one woman) to that of a mandated obligation for two people to be obligated to provide support, safe shelter, provide necessities such as food and clothing, maintain a home, have sexual relations with the other, and raising of the couples children, while both party's live in the same house.

America States offering legalized marriage for same-sex couples

1. CONNECTICUT - (Civil unions will be offered until Oct.1, 2010; following that date, couples in civil unions automatically will be converted to marriage.)
2. IOWA - (Providing a spectacular example for all of the heartland states, Iowa became the first of them to legalize gay marriage as of April 24, 2009. This was following a unanimous state Supreme Court decision on April 3.)
3. MAINE - (May 6, 2009 Gov. John Baldacci was the first governor to sign a same-sex marriage law without a court order compelling him to do so.)
4. MASSACHUSSETTS - (May 17, 2004 the streets came alive with celebrations when the first same-sex ceremonies began.)
5. NEW HAMPSHIRE - (Gov. john Lynch signed a bill on June 3, 2009 that legalized gay marriage and a separate bill giving legal protection to religious organizations who choose not to perform such weddings. Marriages began on Jan.1, 2010.)
6. VERMONT - (Gov. Jim Douglas was overruled by the Democratic-controlled Vermont Legislature when he attempted to veto the legalization of same-sex marriage in April 2009. Wedding licenses began being issued Sept.1, 2009.)
   

A ceremony between same-sex persons which conveys to them certain aspects of marriage for purpose of that state's laws (but not those of other states or the federal government). Rights are conferred in respect of property and probate law, adoption, insurance, hospital visitation, and wrongful death actions as well as insurance and state income tax laws.

CONNECTICUT - (Civil unions will be offered until Oct. 1, 2010; following that date, couples in civil unions automatically will be converted to marriage.)

NEW JERSEY - (Dec. 2006, Gov. Jon Corzine signs a law that permits same-sex couples to enter into civil unions, granting the same state level benefits of married couples.)

Domestic partner or domestic partnership identifies the personal relationship between individuals who are living together and sharing a common domestic life together but are not joined in any type of legal partnership, marriage or civil union.Some legal jurisdictions recognize that individuals who live together after a long period of time, while not entitled to common-law marriage status may be entitled to some protection under the legal concept of domestic partnership. In some places parties that live together enter into domestic partnership arrangements in order to contractually agree to certain issues between them in relation to joint property ownership,support obligations and similar issues to that found in marriage.

Some jurisdictions create domestic partnerships via statute rather than having been the invention of judicial decisions. One of the reasons for the creation of the relationship of domestic partnership is to recognize the contribution of one partner to the property of the other. In the common law such devices such as the constructive trust are available to protect spouses, in legal marriage or in common-law marriage. In civil law jurisdictions this type of legal concept is generally not available so courts have tried to find alternative ways to protect the partner who has contributed to the other partner's property.

Some jurisdictions have instituted domestic partnerships as a way to recognize same-sex unions.

The remaining 36 states have either laws or amendments¹ prohibiting same-sex marriages.    Of these 36 states, only 3 states - New York, Rhode Island and New Mexico- have taken no clear action on the issue in either direction. Make note however that New York and Rhode Island do recognize out-of-state marriages.

¹ _{Amendment doesn't ban same-sex marriage, but rather stipulates that legislature alone, not the courts, can define marriage.}

WHAT ABOUT SAME-SEX MARRIAGE OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES?

• The Netherlands legalized gay marriage in 2001.
• Belgium legalized gay marriage in 2003
• Canadian provinces of Ontario legalized gay marriage in 2003
• British Columbia legalized gay marriage in 2003
• Quebec, Canada legalized marriage in 2004
• All other Canadian provinces legalized marriage in 2005
• Spain legalized marriage in 2005
• South Africa legalized marriage in 2006
• Norway legalized marriage in 2008
• Sweden legalized marriage in 2009

"Marriage is between a man and a woman," is a direct quote offered by president Obama. Although while he was still a U.S. senator, he voted against a proposed amendment to the constitution banning same-sex marriage, feeling this decision was, "best left up to the individual states to decide." He continues to promote the need for states to create and enact alternative marriage options like civil unions and domestic partnerships.

As the LGBT voters are waiting and watching, President Obama quietly checks off his list of the many promises he made during his campaign. The community is not fully poised to joyfully back the President just yet, even as the group is a reliably Democratic camp.

The numbers do show that the Obama White House has done more for gay rights than any other to date. This has not translated into high approval ratings from those who find many problems in the methodical manner the President takes concerning the issues. The LGBT community had expected a fast paced 'change' and had 'hope' for a new world in quick-time. It would seem that neither side, conservatives or activists are running hot or cold regarding Obama's one-step-at-a-time paced administration.

An historical tid-bit from the archives of the George W. Bush White House.

In 2004 and again in 2006 congress tried to get the two-thirds vote needed to amend the U.S. constitution that would ban same-sex marriage. Even as President Bush was an avid supporter of the amendment the ban was defeated on both occasions.

In a surprise response to the questions regarding support for gay marriage rights, President Obama most recently (May 2012) made it clear that he is on the side of gay and lesbian couples who desire to wed legally. He stated in a news briefing that he would and does fully support the rights of lesbians and gays in their quest for full marriage rights! As expected, the right went nuts! Needless to say, his visit to the Bay area for campaign donations the week following his disclosure was an absolute financial landfall!