Same-Sex Marriage #2

Same Sex Marriage
Democracy precludes the rights of the citizens in choosing a government. The state and legislators are responsible for the running of the government and implementing of laws within the nation. Same-sex marriages preclude unions between people of the same sex (Conkle 30). Gays and Lesbians are typical examples of same-sex couples in the USA. Previously, citizens regarded homosexual relationships as unstable psychological people. Scientists carried out numerous researches on the matter and realized little information on the state of the couples within same-sex relationships. However, conservative communities such as African Americans and Filipinos vehemently opposed same-sex relationships in the USA. The clamor for equal rights for all people was as a result of Hawaii court ruling against discrimination against same-sex marriages. Previously, most of the states refused to give certificates of marriage to married same-sex couples in the USA.
Supporters and sympathizers of same-sex marriages previously relied on a ruling that validated interracial marriages in the USA. The supporters substituted the right to marry other races to include the right to marry people of the same sex. The debate resulted in political rhetoric within the nations’ political leadership. The Democrats, known for championing the rights of the citizens were more supportive of same-sex marriages. The Republicans believed that marriage was for procreation purposes, unlike same-sex marriages. The civil rights movement was supportive of same-sex marriages, arguing that the equality right was a fundamental right for every individual in the nation.

The decision of the Hawaii court prompted at least 19 states to enact laws invalidating discrimination of same-sex marriages. However, other states passed laws validating discrimination of same-sex marriages within the respective countries.
The ruling by the nation’s highest court validated the decisions of the courts of appeal and declined to rule on the issue. Politicians, donors, and same sex support groups intensively lobbied the state to implement laws against the discrimination of the same sex marriages. Democrats allowed gays and lesbians to join the party and supported the groups’ clamor to invalidate discrimination of same-sex marriages. The Democrats were against the Defense Marriage Act, which was a discriminative law and against the spirit of the constitution on equal rights for every citizen. The society was divided on the issue, according to previous polls on the subject (Baunach 370). The lukewarm reactions resulted in more campaigns by LGBT (Lesbian, Gays, Bisexual, and Transgender) organizations to create awareness of the groups’ objectives. The Obama administration openly supported the initiative, leading to divisive politics within the nation.
The ruling by the Supreme Court in June 2015 on same-sex marriages ushered in the legalization of same-sex marriages in the federal state. The decision compelled all states to recognize legally same-sex marriages and provide marriage certificates for such unions. The decision has broadened the scope of legal acceptance of same-sex couples in places of work, worship, and government positions. The issue has caused discomfort among married couples and religious citizens, as a deficit in the democratic environment. Churches, medical bodies and lobby groups opposed to same-sex relationships have lobbied for a broader legal system to provide for more protections for same-sex marriages in the society. Consequently, the issue is yet to be nationally accepted and future debate and legal changes will adequately reduce the deficits within the nation.
Diverse Opinions and Political Activism
Same sex marriages are divisive in most countries in the world today. Debate on the issue relates to culture, religious affiliations, political support, and age group influences on the topic. Religious groups in the nation oppose employment of gays or lesbians to religious bodies’. Various religious groups face lawsuits in nearly all states on dismissing and discrimination against the employment of gays and lesbians. Furthermore, the organizations are against the teaching of pupils on same-sex marriages. Advocates and supporters on same-sex marriages are lobbying for integration of same-sex marriage principles into the education system within the USA. The Catholic Church is particularly unhappy with the implementation of the law, as it results in the discrimination of the majority (Soule 460). A study done to estimate the number of gays, lesbians, and transgender couples, revealed that nearly 10% of the population accounted for same-sex marriages in the nation.
Racial support of the issue is divisive along racial and tribal lines. Hispanics, Filipinos, and Asian Americans variedly support the issue. Moreover, age affects support or opposition of the issue in the nation. Elderly citizens in the country vehemently oppose same-sex marriages as unnatural and uncouth in any rational society. Opposition by the elderly is largely similar for all the racial groups. However, teenagers and younger generations openly relate to and support the issue, making the issue highly divisive. African Americans oppose the issue based on cultural affiliations and moral perspective of the issue. Nationally, polls on the support of the issue show that 57% of the population supports the issue though the results of the research widely differ in the nation.
Medical bodies oppose same-sex marriages due to evident medical challenges on the unions. The medical organizations and associations have established medical challenges caused by same-sex unions. Recent reports indicate that gays and lesbians are prone to cheating and often engage in promiscuous behavior. Moreover, HIV prevalence is highest among gays and lesbians in the nation. The research reveals that 10% of same-sex couples have HIV, a challenge for bodies fighting for the eradication of the disease. Moreover, medical practitioners are afraid, same-sex couples are psychologically affected and prone to lower self-esteem. Moreover, high prevalence and transmission of sexually transmitted infections among same-sex couples are a cause for worry for medical bodies. The organization estimates that the government uses more than $5 billion annually on treatment and medication for same-sex couples. Furthermore, the media has also influenced the opinions of the citizens, with the seemingly Empire series getting a backlash on too much homosexuality in the scenes. Therefore, support for the issue is varied and gradually changing in the society.
Diverse political actors have been propelling the issue through political activism. LGBTs (Lesbians, Gays, Bisexual, and Transgender) associations are playing critical roles in the support of same-sex marriages. The movements are many within the nation and play different roles in supporting and creating awareness on the subject (Klarman 12). Immigrant LGBTs receive social and economic benefits from the CAP (Center for American Progress). The organization provides shelters for homeless immigrants and provides other social benefits mainly to LGBTs couples. Furthermore, abortion and sexual crimes have become pertinent issues for lesbians in the nation. NCLR (National Center for Lesbian Rights) has advanced constitutional and legislation review on the factors affecting lesbians in the nation. The organization wants laws regarding abortion broadened to encompass lesbian activity in the country. Furthermore, the organization has established a hotline for victims of sexual assault. Moreover, the Obama administration and the Democrats have openly supported same-sex unions in the nation, heightening political rhetoric on the subject.
Same Sex Marriage as a Democratic Deficit
A Democratic deficit implies a lack of accountability and control in the democratic process. Implementation of same-sex unions was rather spontaneous than gradual. The civil rights movement recognition of same-sex marriage in the USA was unpopular during the implementation of the Supreme’s Court decision. Democratic ideals preclude majority acceptance of an issue in the society. The divisive nature of the subject resonates as a democratic deficit in the society. The American political system has various weaknesses relating to the implementation of democratic ideals in the nations. The subject lacks fairness, progressiveness and inclusiveness within the conclaves of any just society. The American political system has flaws inherent in the administration of equality and justice within the nation. Diverse examples within the nation are proof of the democratic deficit in the society.
Unfairness
Constitutions model democracies as fair and just societies that allow for interactions among diverse groups in the nation. The subjective implementation of same-sex regulations breeds unfairness within the society. The law ushered in regulations relating to hate crimes by sexual orientation. Precisely, since the implementation of the law, sexual assaults and discrimination against LGBTs has increased in the society. Moreover, sports and entertainment sectors are reeling from the effects of integration of the subject within the sectors. Previous announcements by players or artists on sexual orientation, especially gays, and lesbians, have resulted in negative publicity for the players and clubs within the nation. Social media has further divided the nation on the subject due to the anonymity of the users. Hate crimes within the sites have resulted in the implementation of regulations on cyber crimes.
The media has dwelled more on same-sex marriages neglecting the primary function of the media of informing the masses. Media houses broadcast divisive and negative news to gain viewers in the highly competitive industry. Logical discussions within the nation are nearly non-existent due to the discriminatory support of same-sex marriages. The current status of the subject in the society precludes discrimination against traditional marriages in the society. The legal protections for traditional marriages have reduced, thus resulted in unfairness in the administration of justice. Parents are fearful of the effects of children interacting with LGBTs. Parents believe that the unfairness stems from the subjective protections offered by the constitution. Similarly, emerging elected leaders within the political system have hugely benefited the disadvantaged groups unlike the majority of the society (Krimmel, Jeffrey and Justin 10). The changes in the society largely relate to unfairness within the nation, rather than fairness engraved in democratic ideals.
Progressiveness
The laws on same-sex marriages are neither progressive nor flexible within the USA. The events relating to the aftermath of the Supreme’s Court ruling on same-sex marriage, relate to unknown future on the subject. The judiciary is administering laws on the subject as a consequence of discrimination, ignoring the flexibility of the legislation in serving the interests and rights of the citizens. Democratic ideals provide a flexible and progressive legal environment that matches the desires of the majority. However, an overlying question exists on the significance of the majority that supports same-sex marriage in the USA. Politically, politicians supporting LGBTs stand to benefit if the majority of the voters supporting LGBTs, vote in the politicians. Such instances have increased the rigidity of the legal environment in the nation. Furthermore, support groups are establishing smear campaigns against politicians opposing LGBTs in the country.
The dynamics of the justice administration are less progressive in the USA than in other nations. The deficit exists because the definition of majority within the society differs from any democratic society. A simple majority is contrastive of the underlying facts opposed by the opposition. The judges ruling created a lacuna within the legal environment on other issues such as bestiality and high prevalence of divorces among LGBTs. Recent polls indicate an average of 57% of the population support same-sex marriage in the USA. However, the opposing views are widely significant because the number is still high. Moreover, the growth of the church and cultural conservatism may result in further conflicts or lawsuits on the subject. Consequently, for democracy to thrive in the nation, the judicial systems need to make broad rulings on issues touching on democratic ideals in the country.
Inclusivity
Democracies thrive where inclusion in decision making and control of resources is decentralized and majority based. Decentralization of decision making within any state results in high participation levels of citizens in the activities of the state. Recent polls on the popularity of the ruling legalizing same-sex marriages show relatively lower approval ratings in the aftermath of the ruling. Furthermore, integration of same-sex unions’ teachings in educational facilities is a far worse decision. Other groups in the society feel that LGBTs receive preferential treatment in the face of the law, unlike other groups within the nation (Lax and Justin 150). Conflicts among rival groups are rampant in the nation today than before. Therefore, the state ought to consider the varied opinions on the subject and objectively implement an inclusive regulation on the subject.
Policy Recommendation
Policy recommendations on the deficit are amicable solutions for the crisis. The federal government should implement protective legislation for other groups in the nation. Christians and other conservative groups ought to be allowed to practice religion and conservatism freely without fear of reprisals. Moreover, the laws should define the responsibilities and duties of the respective groups. The church is certainly angry of the adoption of legislation requiring the employment of same-sex couples within religious bodies. Moreover, the state ought to review the law making process and make the process inclusive. Furthermore, the state ought to limit support to controversial issues to assist the public to engage in healthy debates on the subject. Also, administration of justice ought to be progressive to preclude the diverse nature of the population and the population’s future expectations. Consequently, policy review is necessary within the nation to reduce the constitutional challenge within the state.
Conclusively, democratic deficits exist where societies lack control and inclusive decision-making bodies. The American society is highly divisive on the subject of same-sex marriage. Previously, same-sex marriages were criminal in nearly all states. However, support groups have advanced the issue as discrimination within the realms of the law. Currently, the subject has divided the nation, according to the latest polls. Religious groups and conservative cultures are some of the groups opposed to the legislation. Major political actors on the subject are LGBTs organizations and political groups. Democratic deficits exist because the law is relatively unfair, rigid and non-inclusive. Consequently, implementation of inclusive democratic laws, review of the law making process and limited support for controversial subjects. Therefore, the American society ought to undertake policy changes to realize a wholly democratic society.
Works Cited
Baunach, Dawn Michelle. “Changing same-sex marriage attitudes in America from 1988
through 2010.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76.2 (2012): 364-378. Print.
Conkle, Daniel O. “Evolving Values, Animus, and Same-Sex Marriage.” Indiana Law
Journal 89 (2014): 27-42. Print.
Klarman, Michael J. From the closet to the altar: courts, backlash, and the struggle for
same-sex marriage. Oxford University Press, USA, 2012. Print.
Krimmel, Katherine L., Jeffrey R. Lax, and Justin H. Phillips. “Gay rights in Congress:
Public opinion and (mis) representation.” Proceedings from Midwest Political
Science Association’s Annual National Conference. Chicago, IL.[Working
Paper]. 2012. Print.
Lax, Jeffrey R., and Justin H. Phillips. “The democratic deficit in the states.” American
Journal of Political Science 56.1 (2012): 148-166. Print.
Soule, Sarah A. “Going to the chapel? Same-sex marriage bans in the United States,
1973-2000.” Social Problems 51.4 (2004): 453-477. Print.