Sociology

Same-sex marriage has become one of the most talked-about issues in America. It has gained more traction recently because of Proposition 8. According to Smith (2005), it has become a quintessential values issue in America and American politics, particularly during the 2004 elections where 11 states prohibited gay marriage. The marriage ban referenda has been recognized with growing voting turnout in some states. However, the same author noted that while courts have administered rulings favoring same-sex marriage in Hawaii, Vermont and Massachusetts, there are still well-organized and well-established opposition against the said movement, politically mobilized and in support of lesbian and gay rights (Smith , 2005).

After the said 2004 US elections, an overpowering majority, which consisted of 13 states, voted to ban same-sex marriage by amending their state constitution, stressing the importance of preserving moral values and fearing that voting otherwise may proceed to cultural and religious divisions in the electorate (Lewis, 2005).

To examine this issue, we must also take a look at the concept of marriage, and why forms have evolved socially. Hymowitz (2004) posits that there are cultures that approve or accept other forms of marriage, whether monogamous or polygamous. The processes also involve either the wife moving into the home of the husbands family or the other way around, or popularly and practically, getting their own (Hymowitz 2004). This is also supported in an article of Robinson (2007), which asserts that societies have some mode of marriage arrangement, which depend on religious backgrounds, as observed by anthropologists. Robinson (2007) even goes on to cite that in primitive times, there exists some form or forms of a religiously sanctioned marriage.

The current campaign for same-sex marriage by activists can be traced from the late 1960s and 1970s with the surge of the gay rights movement, which heavily advocates emancipatory politics (Edwards, 2009). The author suggests that marriage is seen as a barricade of the patriarchal order as it subjugates homosexuals, non-heterosexual men and women. It lead the gay movement to bring down the idea of marriage  ultimately, the idea of social transformation is seen as more inclusive.

In the US, the definition of marriage has seen continuous changes. As Robinson cites (2007), marriage became inclusive even extending to the concept of race and not just of opposite sexes, after the Civil War and further was solidified in the case Loving v. Virginia in 1967. He also cites an incident in Hawaii, which almost left a window open for such union but was immediately closed by a court injunction.

In 1970, the Baker v. Nelson case was filed in the Minnesota Supreme Court which saw the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples. In his article, Baker (2004) cites this landmark case and how US courts reckons that marriage statutes govern those only of opposite-sex couples. In providing an overview, the author cites that 50 states, including the District of Columbia recognized this element, with 42 of these states explicitly defining this description of marriage in their statutory system, including other statutory specifications (Baker, 2004).

Marriage seems to be largely still a government concern, even as history shows. Hymowitz (2004) opines that early American thinkers were interested in the subject of marriage as shown in their understanding of the fundamental sociological truth of familial relationships shaping the political order. The author further said that early political founders are aware of the spiritual element of marriage, and that it is a contract that is standardized by laws, which prescribe property relations and inheritance rights to the children (Hymnowitz, 2004).

Somerville (2003) in quoting Frances Fukuyama echoes that the adherence to the law is related to the societal manifestation of intense individualism, even intense moral individualism, which impacts decision-making on matters of life and death as deeply personal. But in quoting Samuel Johnson, the author says that marriage involved a third party beyond the couple, which can be interpreted as a societal concern, particularly in the breakdown of the marriage and divorce issues. Thus, she argues that if society has a legitimate interest in marriage, it must remain marriage through law (Sommerville 2003, p. 6)

Some people see the matter as a moral issue and seek to protect traditional marriage norms by withholding legal recognition from same-sex marriages, while others see the legality of same-sex marriage as a civil rights issue. Equal recognition for such marriages are also sought such as the benefits of marriage with heterosexual couples (Lupia et al, 2009).

Moral and Socio-cultural Dimensions
The emphasis of values, particularly family and moral, upholds social conservatism which is generally dominated by defending traditional norms or values. As supported in her essay, Nussbaum (2009) points out that marriage  for over millennia  is an institution that upholds socio-cultural values that are strongly connected to procreation, emphasizing human life extension and nurturing. Ultimately, these uphold the basic unit of family, thus it places importance on the man-woman relationship in the process of procreation.

Religious belief is still one of the bases of some peoples objections to same-sex marriage. These are profound beliefs and rooted on principles such as religious sanction, social legitimation and natural origin, but these should be understood to ascertain its impact on the people who legally support same-sex marriage (Sommerville, 2003).

Further, with emphasis on the importance of human life extension, such social conservatism also argues that marriage protects children. In an article by Blankenhorn (2008), he writes that marriage, though evolving in terms of concept, has one constant feature. This is that it molds parenthood or having the license to have and take care of children. Blankenhorn (2008) admits being a liberal democrat, and further says that marriage unites the biological, social and legal aspects of marriage that is pro-child, and assures that child of responsible parenthood (Blankenhorn, 2008).

In her essay, Sommerville (2003) argues that excluding same-sex couples would be ethically acceptable given that the reason is to keep the nature and substance of marriage intact, and to protect procreative relationship. The refusal to grant same-sex marriage would also not be considered as discrimination as there is respect for same-sex individuals and their relationship (Sommerville, 2003).

George (2006) points out that the culture of marriage has been damaged by issues of divorce, non-marital cohabitation and childbearing due to wedlock. The victims of a destabilized marriage are always children, specifically those who are vulnerable or among the poorest in society. The author argues that marriage should be strengthened and not redefined, and it is the people and not the courts who should decide.

Particularly, same-sex marriage underpins the issue of homosexuality. As noted by Sanderson (2003) in his study of the sociological aspect of human sexuality, heterosexuality still dominates as the common sexual practice in societies and thus homosexuality is secondary to heterosexual relations. Though he heavily cites cultural examples  situational homosexuality  there exists firm rules on the kind of relationships that may be practiced (Sanderson, 2003).

Despite Americas ever-shifting attitudes toward homosexuality through time, the reluctance is not surprising. Some 30 years ago, 73 percent of Americans pronounced that same-sex relations between two adults is always wrong, which has always been based on natural law teachings (Liu and Macedo, 2005). The negative attitude towards the idea of homosexuality seems to support the opposition argument towards same-sex marriage. Two assertions revolve at the core of the argument which is that homosexuality is morally inferior and reflects a sinful outcome of obstinate choices, and that homosexual unions are innately non-procreative and basically inferior to heterosexual unions (Segura 2005). Thus, granting legality and acknowledgement to same-sex unions would destabilize the importance of the institution and wear down civil societys foundation (Segura, 2005).

The Politics of Same-Sex Marriage
In a report by CNN on its website, a recent national poll suggests that a majority of Americans oppose the legalization of same-sex marriages, although the survey signifies a wide generational gap on the issue (Steinhauser, 2009). In the CNN-Opinion poll cited by deputy editor Steinhauser, 44 percent say same-sex marriage should not be recognized valid and 44 percent also suggest it should be considered legal. Further, of those aged 18 to 34 years old, 58 percent said same-sex marriages should be legal, but the figures dropped to 42 percent for those aged 35 to 49. 41 percent for those aged 50 to 64, while 24 percent of Americans 65 and older support same-sex marriages, according to the poll (Steinhauser 2009).

There have been fewer comments regarding appellate courts in red states which have considered the same-sex marriage issue more gravely. In a case in Indiana, same-sex plaintiffs did not overcome but it can be said that the courts have done a great deal of looking into it (Gerstmann, 2005). The author further argues that courts and non-judicial political figures have taken on the same-sex marriage issue with the courts rather upfront particularly towards the traditional notion of marriage.

The popularity of the moral choice among American voters seems to be the foremost affirmation of the success of same-sex marriage bans in 11 states, and such observation points out to the re-election of then President Bush who took hold strongly of the prominence of such moral issue (Hillygus and Shields, 2005). But the economy, the Iraq war and other issues have reportedly received considerably little national media attention, where there is pre-occupation with moral values (Hillygus and Shields, 2005).

On one hand, Lewis (2005) points out that amidst the issues like Iraq war, the fight against terrorism, economy, and other political issues, attitudes toward gay relationships do not pose high-level importance. However, Hillygus and Shields (2005) also noted that though voters tendencies were on the previously mentioned issues. More significantly in the South, the issue of same-sex marriage has an independent effect on voters choice.

Lewis (2005) contends that same-sex marriage mattered in the 2004 elections, though it did not place much importance as the economy, Iraq war and terrorism, but significant nonetheless than other issues. Same-sex marriage was an important issue in the presidential elections as reflected by the two-fifths of those who responded to surveys, and its importance was shown and affirmed by the 13 state constitutional amendments on the ballot (Lewis, 2005).

In the paper by Hillygus and Shields (2005), they cited that there is 22.2 percent points difference in predicted probability between anti- and pro-administration views on the issue of gay marriage, while the Iraq issue got 74 percent points, 68.5 percent points on the economy, 55.1 percent points on a support for a multilateral approach to terrorism, and 23.6 percent points on the abortion issue. While these figures propose that Bush may not entirely have benefited from moral issues, as what has been suspected, there is still support found from those with neutral positions on the other issues (Hillygus and Shields, 2005).

The red-stateblue-state polarity among Americans may not be as is sometimes suggested, but rather, the difference of Americans view on issues like same-sex marriage may be aggravated and bolster by specific features of American political institutions (Smith, 2005).

Politics also greatly concern the same-sex marriage issue as it figures prominently in national and international politics. According to an essay by Franke (2006), the author believes that same-sex marriage won George Bush the election, but argues that it distracted the attention away from issues which are of larger impact and greater concern such as the Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and Iraq war. The national debate about morals veered away from serious discussion on state of security, sexuality as weapons of war, and the militarization of foreign policy (Franke, 2006).

Those who are against the case of same-sex marriage have formulated a strategy. As noted by Bidstrup (1996), there are conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court who have initiated a gay marriage lawsuit. This is done seemingly for the right to gay marriage, but in the end it is projected to fail before the Supreme Court. When the lawsuit fails, which is what was intended, it would stop equal-protection challenge to gay marriage bans to the U.S. Supreme Court for a generation (Bidstrup, 1996).

According to a recent CNN article by Steinhauser (2009), any Supreme Court nomination battle between conservatives and progressives will most likely include hot social issues, like same-sex marriage. Baker (2004) says that despite laws and judicial decisions playing significant educative role in our culture, a lagging indicator of public opinion is public policy which will lead to the American people consensus.

Economic of benefits
With regard to the marriage issue, same-sex couples encounter obstacles in privileges, one of the practices that all other Americans take for granted, including hospital visitation, access to medical and legal information, and right to inheritance (Lewis 2005).

In a court proceeding summary, it was noted that in New Jerseys public policy there has been no legitimate public need for an unequal legal scheme of benefits and privileges that go against committed same-sex couples. Further, New Jersey differs from other states because of its prohibition on sexual orientation discrimination, which puts foster children in same-sex households. It also noted that only Connecticut, Vermont, and Massachusetts extend benefits to same-sex couples that are also provided for married heterosexual couples, while New Jersey and few other states provide some level of domestic partner benefits (Zimmerman et al, 2006).

More recently, Franke (2006) cites that Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed same-sex marriage law in California, and it continued to Arizona and Indiana courts which refused constitutional disputes to their marriage laws, an New York appellate court which reversed a trial court finding on permission of same-sex marriage, and a referenda stopping same-sex marriage. Forty-two states have enacted the limitation of marriage to one man and one woman. (Franke, 2006)

According to Pew Forum report, California has been one of the most active battlegrounds in the same-sex marriage debate, which it said began in 2000, during the Proposition 22, defining marriage as a man-woman union. Massachusetts followed with the legalization of gay marriage and San Francisco began issuing same-sex marriage, which was rebuked by the state Supreme Court (event transcript, 2007).

Glendon (2004) asserts that American people should have the opportunity to deliberate the economic and social costs implications. She points out to a problem of distributive justice in terms of treating same-sex households like married couples regarding benefits that are also denied of others like those who are caring for elderly or disabled relatives whom they cannot claim as family members for tax or insurance purposes. Further, she argues that citizens should have a chance to vote on whether or not benefits must be afforded to homosexual unions (Glendon, 2004).

Civil rights
Bidstrup (1996) argues that the issue is a civil rights issue, and continued that it does not involve the third parties, those who perform the ceremony or even its acceptance in local publication. Nor it is also an issue special rights whereby the same-sex couples ask for the same rights that are enjoyed by heterosexual couples, even by constitutional mandate (Bidstrup 1996).

On one hand, Hymowitz (2004) in her essay states that young neo-traditionalists have difficulty comprehending that their upholding of the civil rights revolution is the fight towards a more stable economic life, with many leaning to see the fight for same-sex marriage. The meaning of marriage as an ordinary civil contract that has nothing to do with children should not be reinforced (Hymowitz, 2004).

Media and Opinion
Bidstrup (1996) states that disinformation used in the anti-same-sex marriage campaign comprise almost the same disparities of similar arguments regardless of location. The author notes that arguments such as the promotion of homosexual sex, the undermining of heterosexual marriage, the forcing of churches to sanctify same-sex marriage, the recruitment of adopted children by same-sex couples are untruthful claims.

However, the polls impact on the shaping of the opinion on the issue remains to be seen. As noted by Baker (2004), poll results may point to a start of a new trend or otherwise to a short-term backlash hurled against unpopular judicial decisions in the recent years. Surveys that measure the intensity of opinion may give further insight that peeks into debate dynamics, and suggest that opinions are starting to strengthen, particularly among opponents of same-sex marriage (Baker, 2004).

Conclusion
The growing national debate over the legality of same-sex marriage cannot be undermined. Since the 2004 US presidential elections, it gained more traction and political mobilization. However, state institutions such as courts are yet to heed same-sex marriage legislation because of its multifarious dimensions. State constitutions in the US still do not share common treatments on the legal facet of same-sex marriage. In fact, through the years, American thinkers have been grappling on the concept of marriage as it has truly evolved with particular landmark incidents in the country. Primarily, opposition arguments are inclined on the protection of the family, the basic unit of society, and its procreational purpose, notwithstanding firm social conservative principles.

The nature, essence and purpose of marriage has thus undergone much scrutiny and debate, for clearly, it does not only present political, philosophical or sociological dimensions but including economic as well considering the pro groups have also been clamoring of equal benefits.  It has also presented itself as a civil rights issue because it has deep roots from emancipator politics of the gay movement in the early 1970s.

Moreover, surveys have been conducted largely to gauge public opinion, but clearly, though there is a significant number of opposition, so does the limitation of public policy. As the national debate continues, further studies must be made its applicability and practicability taking into full consideration of the issues various dimensions. While surveys are important in gauging the pulse of the majority, more efforts should be aimed at proper information dissemination, not propagation of untruthful arguments, but valid, practicable options that do not undermine human values.