Same-Sex Marriage: An Overview of Legalization and Social Reactions - Essay Sample

Introduction

Same-sex marriage is a practice of friendship between two women, or two men, this type of marriage has been regulated by law, religion and other aspects of the society, but over the years legal and social responses to same-sex marriage have ranged from celebration to criminalization by different parties, in 2015, the U.S supreme court issued a landmark ruling which legalized and gave same-sex couples in all the 50 states a constitutional right to join together in marriage. Same-sex marriage is a diverse political issue that provokes ethical and constitutional arguments on both sides of groups against and for same-sex marriage.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The LGBT community most likely cites love as the primary reason for getting into marriage, and same-sex marriages are on the rise as more countries legalize it. On the grounds of ethics, people argue that denying some people the right to marry is discriminating them and hence creating a second class of citizens which is detrimental to equality as same-sex couples are denied equal dignity and are deemed unworthy of participating in an institution that is fundamental in the society. On the other hand, constitutional arguments state that when same-sex marriages are legalized, it gives other people in polygamous, bestial, and nontraditional relationships the right to marry and further weaken the institution of marriage. It is because traditional marriage has already been weakened by high rates of divorce, making it seem like a failing institution hence the need for alternatives. (Gerstmann, 2017) Also, marriage is a globally recognized institution that should be equal to all people according to the American foundation of equal rights. Same-sex marriage is a civil right and is one of the critical civil rights struggles of our time and has been listed alongside fair sentencing for minority criminals and equal pay for women, among other selections of civil rights.

Same-sex marriages are considered unnatural and immoral; people involved in such marriages know that it is self-destructive but still thirst for affirmation hence making it legal seems like promoting something irrational. (Poggione, 2019) Same-sex marriages are incompatible with certain beliefs and sacred texts as well as traditions of various religious groups; hence, no ideology can erase the truth of marriage being solely between man and woman. The sexual orientation which promotes same-sex marriages is a choice and a lifestyle that people can do without and have no negative consequences. Several members of the justice system have claimed that the ban on same-sex marriage causes unnecessary stigmatization for children being raised by loving same-sex couples and limits stability as well as succession in cases of separation.

The U.S court ruling that same-sex marriages should be allowed in all the 50 states is a perfect example of federal outreach because the federal government should let the different states make laws for themselves on issues that are not of significant urgency such as same-sex marriage which destabilizes the family and marriage roles in the society. U.S citizens should not have their tax dollars used to support unions that they do not agree with and which bring less stability in family groups. I believe that marriage should be heterosexual that is between man and woman because the basic purpose of marriage is procreation before companionship and physical gratification. Same-sex marriage is a choice that people make and can choose to avoid. Marriage is a privilege and not a right; hence, the state has a valid interest and will benefit more from protecting the traditional definition of marriage. (Landers, 2015) Same-sex marriage is a human construct that goes against the natural order of things and limits procreation as its main focus is on physical gratification.

The Affordable Health Act

The affordable Act was signed by President Barack Obama was an enactment that was aimed at ensuring that more people had access to health insurance in the United States. It was also enacted to improve the quality of healthcare and also to improve health insurance. It was enacted to regulate the insurance industry ad also helps reduce health care in the United States. The Act to uplift the levels of health care in the country and ensure that the country would then regulate and improve the quality of health care among all the citizens and the industry of insurance was also regulated.

The various effects that became with the Act include, at the start of 2014, after its implementation, insurance companies would not raise premiums for infants because of pre-existing disabilities - bypassing the Act, adults who in the previous years could not access health care coverage as a result of pre-existing nature and those who had no insurance cover for six months or more (Chen, J., Vargas-Bustamante, A., Mortensen, K., & Ortega, A. N. 2016).

Obama care also saw the pre-existing condition insurance plan that was aimed at adults who were not able to health and insurance cover because of pre-existing states like cancer and diabetes. As of 2014, the Obama care act was available to them all the time.

Because of the Act, health insurers would not cancel coverage for people with similar pre-existing conditions as diabetes. It was required by the Act that the state would cover such conditions and that insurers could not request any charge. Because of the enactment, pregnancy would then cover, and the perennial care and all the care till birth would be covered totally. The Act brought a greater good for the citizens of the country because now every health-related matter that the Act outlines would b fully covered by the state (Blumenthal, D., Abrams, M., & Nuzum, R. 2015).

However, upon the enactment of the Act, The following administration of Trump ceased to support the Act, and this brought a stalemate and a great effect on the state relations. The impact on relations as a result of the enactment of the Act saw the intervention of the Supreme Court, which had to rule between the provisions of Trump or Obamacare. The stalemate came in as a result of the current president's lack to support the previous Obamacare and instead come up with their provision known as the Trumpcare.

The way I would suggest to end the stalemate between the two provisions would be to allow the Supreme Court to monitor closely and offer a ruling that would protect the afforded rights of the people living with pre-existing conditions such as diabetes. The supreme consideration of the population because, as per the Kaisely Family Foundation, nearly 64% of the population are in support of Obamacare, which offers protection for those living with pre-existing conditions (Sommers, B. D., Gunja, M. Z., Finegold, K., & Musco, T. 2015).

The supporters of health care are in a firmer ground constitutionally because the Act offers a better way of offering support and insurance cover for those living with pre-existing conditions like diabetes. Also, the fact that a bigger population of the country supports the Act, it then holds a constitutional basis. Obama care holds the position more consistent with America national values because of it a provision and law that indeed identifies with the people. The fact that a more significant population of the country are in support of the Obama care proves how much a constitutional ground the Act holds.

References

Gerstmann, E. (2017). Same-sex Marriage and the Constitution. Cambridge University Press.

Landers, S. (2015). Civil rights and health-Beyond same-sex marriage. New England Journal of Medicine, 373(12), 1092-1093.

Poggione, S. (2019). The Evolution of Same-Sex Marriage Policy in the United States. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.

Blumenthal, D., Abrams, M., & Nuzum, R. (2015). The affordable care act at 5 years.

Chen, J., Vargas-Bustamante, A., Mortensen, K., & Ortega, A. N. (2016). Racial and ethnic disparities in health care access and utilization under the Affordable Care Act. Medical care, 54(2), 140.

Sommers, B. D., Gunja, M. Z., Finegold, K., & Musco, T. (2015). Changes in self-reported insurance coverage, access to care, and health under the Affordable Care Act. Jama, 314(4), 366-374.