Hoffer1
Brittany Hoffer
Ms. Schneider
Intro to English Comp
05 November 2014
Homosexuals v. Heterosexuals
Only difference, liking the opposite sex
These days people look at same-sex orientation as an understanding of someone who
chooses a way of life, but only down a different path. I remember when coming out of the closet
meant social suicide, but that was back in high school. Now, it is like homosexuals or gays do
not care, as if they can be free and not have to worry about what people think. Thanks to people
who wrote about gay rights and took the discriminatory actions against them to court, they can
choose to get married in certain states and have the same rights as heterosexuals do. This is all
because of the Gay Rights Movement. Without this movement, all of this would not have
happened. Ever since the 1960s, homosexuals have been disliked for their personal preference,
but as far as I’m concerned, we are all the same shade of gray and what goes on behind closed
doors is just a personal preference.
In, “Constituting sexuality: rights, politics, and power in the gay rights movement”, Lalor
explains how unconstitutional the law can be toward homosexuals, rather it be lesbians, gays, bisexual or transgender, heterosexuals are both complex, and contested productions. This is an
issue that has been on the rise for debate, since the 1960s. Though, in a political view, many
have strong feelings against the same-sex. Others seek to see justice for them as it is
unconstitutional making a law against same-sex, because nothing in the Constitution can be
Hoffer2
discriminatory. Some are concerned with the rights, particularly international human rights; as
of sexuality surroundings and others understandings of both sexual subjectivity and sexual
identity across the world. The concerns have brought up many problems among gay rights. The
law is another issue on sexuality and marginality, about how homosexuals have trouble for the
same human rights. Although sexuality is known for a desire to have relations, but can be
exposed, examine and reworked through the law. (Lalor, Kay)
Reading an online newspaper, “Victories for gay rights: High court: Equality for samesex couples”, Savage writes about certain cases that have helped the gay rights movement
improve. California v. Supreme Court decidedly took defense of the Marriage Act to legalize
same-sex marriage. Thanks to Justice Anthony Kennedy, the public believes that it is unjustified
if an authorized personnel was to deny equal rights for same-sex marriage. Even in states where
marriage is legal, although five out of four votes decided to deny legal recognition, but another
five out of four votes threw out the appeal for the ballot 8, that limited marriage to only
heterosexuals. This allowed gays and lesbians to marry. Since then the court ruled to not deny
anyone who is treated less as second-class marriage. Thousands of homosexuals were able to
legally marry, like Edith Windsor. She is a New York widow who was able to legally marry, but
the court did not grant her equal rights after the loss of her wife to the federal law about the
Internal Revenue Service for not giving the same benefits as heterosexuals would get.
Controversy still rises on federal benefits for same-sex couples. A conservative who is belonged
to tradition in America, opinionated an issue of a judge in San Francisco, who recently had a
court case about two same-sex couples who wanted marriage since it is constituted as equal
rights. The couples won awhile state officials did not seek to reopen. Sponsors in California
notice the change since the 1990s for homosexual couples to gain the same rights as
Hoffer3
heterosexuals. Though, what caught the nation was the action that caused President Clinton to
sign a bill forbidding same-sex marriage. Accept, 29 of those 37 states who deny same-sex
marriage have state constitutional measures limiting marriage between a man and a woman.
This issue is still on the debate for America. (Savage, David G)
By choosing certain chapters from, “Gay Rights: Revised Edition”, to help support my
reasons to allow gay rights to be legalized, I have considered this book made my argument more
reasonable. Since three decades, the topic of negotiating homosexuality and the equal rights that
allow the people who choose to be this to consider the freedom they deserve. Awhile this was a
start of a taboo subject is now the common debate of national society. In 2004, the state of
Massachusetts, Canada, and certain European nations, places that legally recognize same-sex
marriage. During that year, an election was held where eleven states voted to ban same-sex
marriage. People who are homosexual decided to take their battles to court, but many
accomplished for domestic partnership benefits, antidiscrimination, and antigay violence. Like
the 2003 case, Lawrence v. Texas, laws outlawing sodomy were unconstitutional. Sodomy is a
type of sexual practice associated with homosexuality. The Supreme Court ruled for sodomy to
be a violation of the Constitution. Around the world, the gay rights movement have celebrated
many accomplishments throughout history, but there have been others who try to demolish the
success. February 2004, President Bush supported prohibition of gay marriage through a
proposed constitutional amendment for marriage to be only between a man and a woman.
Again, arranging people who are antigay into groups was challenging for the gay rights
movement, but seeing how slowly the accomplishments came made this more memorable. Like
the time when an increase of 80 percent in 2003 from 51 percent in 1977 that did not allow gays
to be in the military, or when school teachers were widely accepted from 27 percent to 61
Hoffer4
percent in 2003, and the time when 26 percent of voters stated they rather go for an intelligent
gay president, raised 59 percent for same issue in 1999. Gay marriage is a civil union (a legal
form of gay family recognition from each state to another). A gay marriage would have a more
define license explaining the partnership between the two and from the location of the marriage
would have to recognize the terms of the partnership. Is being gay a way of learning or inherited
or chosen? Honestly, it is too mysterious to analyze. Our genes do determine who we are, but
not the relationship of who we choose to be with. The issue is mainly a change of tradition. No
one, usually, likes to break tradition. Someone could live a life for so many years, but then one
day they would have to change their beliefs for reasons that might make their place better or not.
Homosexuals only ask for the same rights as other heterosexuals might have as of financial
benefits, social demands for emotional satisfaction, and to adopt children like as men and women
can do. History will keep repeating itself, no one can keep someone from wanting what they
want and it is consider a freedom choice. History is following us, the first gay rights
organization in the United States was founded by a communist by the name of Henry Hay in
1950. The first lesbian rights group of the Daughters of Bilitis in 1955. Both of these started in
California, as remembered this history starts with only a little number of states, but has raised
debate in many. Like the Stonewall uprising started in Greenwich Village, generally accepted
that a diverse group of bar patrons, led by drag queens fought back a police raid that turned into a
riot for days. Soon after that, a Gay Liberation Front was created in July 1969, later another
group of Gay Activist’s alliance was created. Due to Hate Crime Statistics Act, the Supreme
Court had cases recognize this act, as of Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), Romer v. Evans (1996),
and Boy Scouts of America ET.AL. v. Dale (2000). Even in Federal Court cases like of Norton
v. Macy (1969). Also State Court cases of Gay students organization of the University of New
Hoffer5
Hampshire v. Bonner (1974). These cases were the reasons the gay rights movement launched.
Rather it be for employment, marriage, financial benefits or legal rights. (Kranz, Rachel and
Cusick, Tim)
As read in my discussion for legalizing all equal rights to a person who is homosexual or
for same-sex couples, in hope to get the point across for the information provided to help others
understand that eliminating this debate will solve a mystery of what others choose for who they
are isn’t our business. To ensure the proof of my research, this writer has created a convenience
phone survey from a selection of random friends in my contacts who were located in my iPhone.
By randomly choosing five girls and five boys all between the ages of 18 through 21. The
questions this writer asked was how they thought of a person who is homosexual, how do they
feel about same-sex marriage, and do they think Ohio should legalize same-sex marriage. All of
the five girls seem to answer the questions with positive statements and viewing the issue as a
person’s choice not theirs. Three out of five of the guys, also stated their opinions as positively a
person’s choice, but the two had a more complex answer that was close to unsure of how they
feel about the questions. Even though about every answer from the subjects surveyed, this writer
has made the argument clear and with the information provided, this is sure to make people
think, but to choose for a pro-choice in these issues. The journal analyzed gave a mere broad
statement of how sexuality is unconstitutional, not forgetting the newspaper article gave a brief
description and explanation on how equal rights improved awhile giving an example for better
understanding, and the book read and chosen certain chapters that accomplished the views to
help get the point across with the help of history for the gays. Others should not live by a
person’s look, but by who they are. Ever since the 1960s, homosexuals have been disliked for
Hoffer6
their personal preference, but as far as I’m concerned we are all the same shade of gray and what
goes on behind closed doors is just a personal preference.
Work Cited
Lalor, Kay. “Constituting sexuality: rights, politics and power in the gay rights movement.”
International Journal of Human Rights. 15. 1364-2987 (2011): 683-699. Print.
Savage, David G. “Victories for gay rights: High Court Equality for same-sex couples.”
Tribune Publishing Company LLC. 27 June. 2013: 1.1 Print.
Kranz, Rachel. Cusick, Tim. “Gay Rights.” Facts on File. Rev ed. New York, NY. 2005. Print.
Hoffer, Brittany. Personal interview. 10 Nov. 2014.