Same Sex Marriage is a choice.
People love who they love,
others can’t choice for them.
For years, the Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender
and feminist communities have recognized that
same-sex couples cannot participate fully in our
society if they are denied the rights and
responsibilities offered to heterosexual couples
through marriage. Because of this it has led to
cases in various states to where the couples have
to secure their own rights to marry.
ARTICLES OPPOSING
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

Bradley, Gerard V., "Same-Sex Marriage: Our Final Answer?" Notre Dame Journal
of Law, Ethics & Public Policy, 14:729-752 2000

Coolidge, David Orgon; & Duncan, William C., "Reaffirming Marriage: A
Presidential Priority," Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 24:623-651 Spring
2001

Coolidge, David Orgon, "Same-Sex Marriage? Baehr v. Miike and the Meaning of
Marriage," South Texas Law Review, 38:1-119 March 1997.

Dent, George W. Jr., "The Defense of Traditional Marriage," The Journal of Law
and Politics, 15:581-644 Fall 1999
The movement to open civil marriage to same-sex couples
achieved its first temporary success in 1993 with the decision
of the Hawaii Supreme Court that the restriction of marriage
to opposite-sex couples would be presumed unconstitutional
unless the state could demonstrate that it furthered a
compelling state interest. In response to this decision the state
constitution was amended to allow the legislature to preserve
that restriction.
In Nov. 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that barring
same-sex couples from civil marriage was unconstitutional. The Senate
then asked the court for an advisory opinion on the constitutionality of a
proposed law that would bar same-sex couples from civil marriage but
would create civil unions as a parallel institution, with all the same
benefits, protections, rights and responsibilities under law. In February,
the court answered, "segregating same-sex unions from opposite-sex
unions cannot possibly be held rationally to advance or preserve" the
governmental aim of encouraging "stable adult relationships for the good
of the individual and of the community, especially its children." Under
this decision, the state of Massachusetts began issuing marriage licenses to
same-sex couples in May 2004.
Same sex marriage is not allowed any many states as you
know. Many people are not for same sex marriage I
don’t see while know harm is done toward them as you
know. To me love is love, if you really love someone
then that’s your choice, there for it’s your choice
weather it’s girl and girl or guy n guy.Your call on who
you love not others around you.
A similar court decision in Alaska in 1998 led to an even
stronger constitutional amendment, itself defining
marriage as between one man and one woman. In further
reaction to the Hawaii case, the federal Defense of
Marriage Act 1996 provided that no state would be
required to recognize a same-sex marriage from another
state, and also defined marriage for federal-law purposes
as opposite-sex. The majority of the states also passed
their own "marriage protection acts." In November 2004,
eleven more U.S. states amended their constitutions to
prohibit same-sex marriage.
1971 Now issued its first policy statement recognizing
lesbian rights as a feminist issue. The statement
acknowledged that a woman's right to independence and
self-determination includes the right to define and
express her own sexuality and to choose her own
lifestyle. This policy cited some of the more blatant
forms of discrimination against lesbians-employment,
education, child custody and marriage-emphasizing that
lesbian couples are denied all the economic and legal
benefits granted to married women, including tax
deductions, insurance benefits, inheritance rights and
more.
The Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996
and signed by former President Bill Clinton,
defined marriage as "the legal union between
one man and one woman," and asserted that
no state is required to recognize a same-sex
marriage performed in another state. In
addition, 38 states have passed their own
Defense of Marriage acts.
President Obama's first Supreme Court
nominee, it has become clear that the topic
of marriage equality a.k.a., same-sex
marriage, will be front and center.
Six months after gay and lesbian couples began
legally marring in Massachusetts, opponents of
same-sex marriage swept Election Day, with
voters in 11 states approving constitutional
amendments codifying marriage as an
exclusively heterosexual institution.
The amendments won in Arkansas, Georgia,
Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi,
Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio,
Utah and even Oregon the one state where
gay rights activists had hoped to prevail.
The amendments passed with a 3-to-1 margin in
Kentucky, Georgia and Arkansas, 3-to-2 in Ohio
and 6-to-1 in Mississippi. Bans passed by
narrower margins in Oregon, about 57 percent,
and Michigan, about 59 percent.
CALIFORNIA
Current law-State law, passed by public referendum, bans
same-sex marriage In defiance of that law, San
Francisco issued more than 3,200 marriage licenses to
same-sex couples. The state high court is expected to
rule on the validity of those marriages. The state will
extend certain state-level marriage benefits to those on a
domestic partners' registry starting Jan. 1, 2005.
Why can’t same-sex couples have access to the same rights and
protections as their straight neighbors simply because they are
citizens? How would we respond if the right to interracial
marriage were based on the prospects that these relationships
made good business sense or added to the state budget? While
economic arguments were certainly advanced during the
struggle for African-American civil rights — in the late 1950s,
Atlanta’s business-oriented mayor, William B. Hartsfield,
promoted his city as being “too busy to hate” — those rationales
are not what we think about when we remember that struggle’s
highest ideals.
FLORIDA
Current law-adopted as state law
Legislation-None Court action-Miami lawyer Ellis
Rubin has filed 8 lawsuits 3 federal cases and 5 state
cases in 2004 on behalf of about 40 same-sex couples.
Two of the federal cases seek recognition of marriages
performed in Canada and Florida and challenge the
federal Defense of Marriage Act. The other cases were
filed on behalf of unwed same-sex couples seeking
the right to marry. None have gone to trial yet. The
National Center for Lesbian Rights has filed a lawsuit
on behalf of six same-sex couples challenging
Florida's same-sex marriage ban.
HAWAII
Current law-Constitutional amendment giving the
legislature the right to reserve marriage to
opposite-sex couples. DOMA passed by the
legislature and adopted as state law by public
referendum. But Hawaii law provides limited
state benefits to same-sex partners.
http://www.acslaw.org
Same-Sex Marriage is a Feminist Issue
www.hrcactioncenter.org
http://lawlibrary.rugers.edu/SSM.html
Same-Sex Marriage: A Selective Bibliography of the Legal Literature
http://www.ncsl.org
Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships
http://www.stateline.org
States that allow same sex marriage
http://www.nytimes.com
The Wrong Reasons for Same-Sex Marriage
("Same Sex Marriage" 1)
("ARTICLES OPPOSING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE" 3)
("What I think" 6)
("Why Not Civil Unions or Partnerships" 8)
("CALIFORNIA " 15)
("FLORIDA " 17)
("HAWAII" 18)