Getting Smart: Why Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized Throughout the US

So this is something i wrote about two years ago as an english assignment... Before I came out. Like most of my English pieces (not meaning to brag... well) it received full marks. My teacher, so impressed asked if I would read it out in class. It's fair to say that that was definitely in my top ten most terrifying moment EVER. Standing up and reading to a bunch of teenagers (most of whom found and still find the notion of being gay a novelty - more on that later) about gay marriage. Anyway here it is. 

In the United States and in other countries across the world, huge tensions and political debates are arising over whether or not same-sex marriage should be legalized. It is my opinion that by denying same-sex couples the right to lawfully wed, you make them second class citizens. Therefore, in the United States, same-sex marriage should be legalized presently.

It is often argued by those opposing the legalization of same-sex marriage that marriage is an institution meant between one man and one woman, this is also the argument written in US law.

However, this argument is clearly untenable. Who defines marriage? Religion? If this is the case, although the belief may be kept within religious communities, no religious text should directly affect US law, this very point is codified within US law, hence, if this is the case, US law is contradicting itself massively. If it is the married, however, who define marriage, then is it not unfair that those given and enjoying the right to marry can actively deny others the right to marry. Or, finally, it could be tradition that defines marriage. In which case, the tradition of marriage has been broken countless times throughout history, sometimes, for the better. One example of this is divorce, first legalized in Greek-Roman culture, then later on, famously legalized by Henry VIII in medieval England.

Another point often opined by US senates, is that marriage’s main purpose is for procreation and the stable raising of children. This is a point that often angers supporters of same-sex marriage. This is because this argument contradicts itself on so many levels, as well as failing to reward itself little sense. If this argument stated were to be codified in US law, it would not only deny same-sex couples to marry, but also infertile couples, and couples who have no intention of having children. It should also be pointed out that studies have shown same-sex couples just as capable as raising children as their heterosexual counterparts. And although same-sex couples are physically incapable of having children together, they are perfectly able to take part in surrogacy and adoption. 

Another fear that many people attain about the legalization of same-sex marriage, is that churches and other religious establishments would be forced to marry same-sex couples, hence putting there beliefs into disrepute. However the proposition contains no such statement, it would be a right not a requirement, that churches could marry same-sex couples. Nor would any law allowing same-sex marriage, deny the right of religious beliefs contradicting such a law.

After evaluating all of the above it is my belief that dis-allowing same-sex marriage is non-sensical and denies the liberation of around 5% of the US population.