Legitimizing Same Sex Families

Abstract
Everyone has an opinion on marriage and whether or not it should be kept between a man and a woman or should be open to everyone, including people in same-sex relationships. This paper details some of the main arguments for gay marriage as well as reasons against it. It also includes the argument of whether or not civil unions are a good compromise for allowing gay men and lesbian women the opportunity to have the benefits of being together. Also covered is the issue of gay parents being fit to raise children and the effects that gay parents have on their children, whether it be positive or negative. Same-sex couples adopting is also an issue discussed in this paper.

Introduction In today’s society the topic of gay marriage is discussed everywhere. In American culture today there are many different views on gay marriage and what rights gay men and lesbian women should have. Among these debates include what a marriage should be comprised of and if gay men and lesbian women meet this criteria, and if they do meet this criteria, is a civil union good enough, or is marriage the only solution. Another controversial aspect of same sex couples is whether or not they are fit to raise children and what affects this has on the child. Although this topic is controversial, research shows that to be a legitimate family there has to be the option of marriage as well as the ability to raise children.
What is Marriage? One of the most important things to recognize for those considering marriage is its universal significance. Whether it be a marriage between a man and a woman or between two men, or two women, marriage has an important impact on our society. According to Snyder (2006), there are four components to the institution of marriage. The first component is a personal bond. This bond is what brings the two people getting married together in the first place. Second is the community-recognized relationship. This is important to marriage because it shows others the promise the couple has given to each other. The third component is the religious right. This is because marriage was first originated within the religious realm, and only recently has it been taken out of that context in the United States for other purposes other than religion. The final component is the civil contract. These four are the most important components to marriage however, it does not take all four to complete a marriage. A marriage can consist of three aspects, for example, if a couple is not religious, then that part is not part of their marriage, however, the other three are. Typically at least three are present, but it depends on the couple. (P.15) These aspects tie into gay marriage because these four principles are what gay men and lesbian women are fighting. They are also what anti-gay activists are fighting against. Politically, the gay couples are fighting for marriage rights benefits such as tax deductions and health insurance, and people fighting against marriage rights for gays are more concerned with the religious aspect.
For Gay Marriage vs. Civil Union Everyone has an opinion on gay rights. Only recently has there been movement to gain rights for being in a committed same-sex relationship. People for gay rights believe that gays in America should have the right to become acknowledged as legitimate families. Americans emphasize that when two people love each other, they should get married and start a family, which is what is considered normal. Same-sex couples are being deprived of their right to traditional family life in America due to this discrimination. In America to be a legitimate family, marriage is involved. It is the most widespread way that people show that they are in a long-term, committed relationship. Americans see marriage as the foundation of a family, but what if the right to a marriage is deprived? Does that negate everything that that family unit stands for? Does it make their love for one another any less? People for gay rights believe this subtle jab at the gay community is sending a message that they are lesser citizens because of their sexual orientation. Being a legitimate family does not stop at being married; it includes having children. Today however, there are very limited options for same-sex couples trying to have children. Adoption is not even allowed to same sex couples in certain states such as Utah and Florida.
Originally the idea was to grant gay couples the same rights as gay couples, only later did the idea of civil unions come to be. According to Hull (2004), “In 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that the denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples violated the common benefits clause of the Vermont constitution, and charged the legislature with amending the marriage laws or setting up an alternative legal vehicle to deliver the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples.” (P. 1) This spurred the anti-gay population to begin looking for a way to ban the gays from having the right to be married. In Baker v. State of Vermont, the state Supreme Court ordered its legislature to give the same protections that come from marriage under Vermont law to same sex couples. In this case there was the option to grant marriage rights, but instead the court decided that they needed to create something separate that would still grant all the same rights. This resulted int eh creation of civil unions. According to the Human Rights Campaign, “same sex marriage could actually save taxpayers money because it would help families take care of each other more effectively, thus lessening their need for state or federal government assistance” (as cited in Snyder,2006, P.40). In studies in Massachucetts and California, the Human Rights Campaign also found that if they extended the domestic partner benefits to same sex couples, it would save taxpayers millions of dollars. It also projected that it would save the state almost 8 million dollars each year. Although domestic partnerships would be beneficial to the state, it isn’t the same as actually being married. Some say that they are for civil unions or domestic partnerships but against gay marriage. So why it is so important for same sex couples to have the right to marry? Marriage is not just a sign of love, but also a legal status that has many rights and responsibilities connected to it. It is recognized across every country and religion whereas civil unions are not. One of the many reasons that domestic partnerships or civil unions are not enough for same-sex families is because of the many benefits that are given for being legally married. According to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (2012), “the 1,138 federal benefits and protections of marriage are only available to couples that are allowed to legally marry. These include Social Security survivor and spousal benefits, the ability to file a joint tax return, immigration rights and coverage under the Family and Medical Leave Act.” That is an astonishing number of benefits that are not given to same-sex couples in a domestic partnership or a civil union when these partnerships are supposed to include these rights. In addition to all of the benefits same sex-couples would gain by being married there are still skeptics who think that same-sex marriage would weaken the institution, causing marriage to be less sacred and overall be the downfall of marriage all together.
Negative Views on Gay Marriage In many religions being in a gay or lesbian relationship is seen as sinful. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1993), “homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained…Under no circumstances can they be approved” (Para. 2357). This is the stance they have had on the issue for many decades, and their stance continues to stay the same year after year. According to Pope John “this is a time in which there is no lack of attempts to reduce marriage to a mere individual contract, with characteristics very different from those that belong to marriage and the family, and that end up degrading it as if it were a form of accessory in association within the social body.” (as cited in Floyd, 2004, P. 132) These views on gay marriage is what is keeping it from happening in the United States. The strong views of the church and its members are continuing to fight that marriage is a sacred act between a man and a woman. Throughout history marriage has been defined as a man and a woman joining together. Rauch (2004) explains
For the entire history of civilization, marriage has been between men and women. In every religion, every culture, every society--maybe with some minor and rare exceptions, none of them part of our own heritage-marriage has been reserved for the union of male and female. All the words in the world cannot change that. Same-sex marriage would not be an incremental tweak but a radical reform, a break with all of Western history. (P. 36)
Because of this, it is encouraging generation after generation to continue validating marriage as a sanctioned religious institution between only a man and a woman.
In some opinions gay marriage is destroying the family and weakening the institution of marriage. It is not giving children the proper foundation for what they need to become independent members of society. According to Mantilla (2004), she wrote that marriage itself is what children need to give them the financial and emotional support that they need. She states that all children should have the right to healthcare and resources that will enhance their life and that come within marriage (P.23). Without these basic essentials these children could be at risk of not getting the proper healthcare that they need as developing children such as basic vaccinations and physical examinations. Also, According to Brumbaugh, Sanchez, Nock, and Wright (2008) “We suggest those who feel more threatened by the perceived cultural weakening of heterosexual marriage are more likely to oppose gay marriage. Those who have a greater personal stake in the institution of marriage perhaps feel a greater need to ‘protect’ marriage from the threat of gay marriage.” (347) This affects those who are already in a marriage by suggesting that gay marriage will lessen the importance of their own marriage.
Same-sex Parents Parenting
There are many people who say that same-sex parents are not good parents however according to Bradley it is assumed that homosexuals having children increase the risk of having homosexual children. Also, they could possibly have more cognitive disadvantages due to the lack of having two of the same sex parents. This disadvantage could also be attributed to a lack of economic security. However, according to sociological studies, they show that there isn’t any evidence connecting children of same sex parents to be confused about their gender identity or more likely to be homosexual. On the contrary, it shows that the children of same sex couples, especially daughters of lesbian parents are more open to the ideas of questioning their sexual identities as well as being more open to others (139). There are many parents who are same-sex couples and have raised productive children in America today. According to Onderko there are approximately 1 million gay families raising approximately 2 million kids in the United States. That is a large amount of children in the United States who are being raised by same-sex couples and will most likely be just as “normal” as a child growing up in a family with a mother and a father. Some of the biggest concerns of people who are against gay families and gay marriage is that gays are not good parents. One of the biggest questions on this issue is if a parent’s sexual orientation has an impact on a child’s development. According to Wainright, Russel and Patterson Research has only found few links concerning parental sexual orientation and a childs welfare, however, it has shown suggestions that other concepts in a same-sex family might affect a childs adjustment, for example, division of labor between parents. This research has had a focus on children born or adopted by lesbian mothers , or, where they were born into a heterosexual family, but then one of the parents opted for a lesbian or gay lifestyle. Overall, the results of the studies have made it clear that whether they are raised by a gay men, lesbian women or heterosexual parents; their development is similar (p. 1886). Essentially there is no difference in how a child will turn out based on whether or not their parents are homosexual, but it is affected by the parenting style specific to that parent. Overall, there are no studies that prove that gays and lesbians are better or worse parents than those parents who are in a heterosexual relationship or single parents.
Gay Parents Adopting
In many areas of the country it is controversial that gays and lesbians adopt children. There are few states that allow openly gay parents to adopt. According to the American Acadamy of Pediatrics here are a few different ways for same-sex couples to adopt. If it is allowed in the state, then joint adoption is an option, however in most states it is not. If joint adoption is not allowed then a child can be adopted through second parent adoption. This type of adoption involves one parent who already has legal rights of the child, usually a biological parent or adoptive legal parent and a second parent or coparent is petitioning for joint rights. The initial parent does not give up parental rights. There is also step-parent or domestic partnership adoption which is allowed when a child is already living with both same-sex parents, step parent, or domestic partner. “Denying legal parent status through adoption to coparents or second parents prevents these children from enjoying the psychological and legal security that comes from having two willing, capable, and loving parents.” (339). By denying these parents the legal right to see their children it is setting the example to the child that the other parent is not as worthy as the other parent is under the law. However, as Lavely states, gay marriage and gay adoption go hand in hand, however, there are more places in the United States where gay parents are allowed to adopt and they aren’t allowed to get married. (P. 247)This is an interesting concept seeing as if the decline of the family is due to the lack of marriage but same sex couples are allowed to adopt and not marry, it is a contradiction whether or not same sex marriage is something seen as a positive or a negative.
Conclusion
Overall studies are being done on this controversial topic to help enhance our knowledge of both sides of gay marriage. Altogether, there will always be discussion of gay marriage and the rights of gay men and lesbian women, whether it be to allow civil unions and not marriage or to not allow any rights to same sex couples. Religion will always play a part in this controversy. Also, the rights to whether or not gay men and lesbian women can adopt and raise children will be an ongoing investigation as the number of these cases arise. It is very clear that for same sex couples to be legitimate families in our society, they have to have the option to reap all of the rewards from being married and raising children.

References
Bradley, Richard R. "Making a mountain out of a molehill: a law and economics defense of same-sex foster care adoptions." Family Court Review 45.1 (2007): 133-148. Academic
Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 30 May 2011.
Brumbaugh, S. M., Sanchez, L. A., Nock, S. L., & Wright, J. D. (2008). Attitudes toward gay marriage in states undergoing marriage law transformation. Journal Of Marriage &
Family, 70(2), 345-359. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00486.x
Coparent or second-parent adoption by same-sex parents. (2002). Pediatrics, 109(2), 339.
Floyd, R. W. (2004). The gay agenda: it 's dividing the family, the church, and a nation. Green
Forest, AR: New Leaf Press.
Hull, K. (2004). Competing visions of law: civil unions in vermont. Conference Papers –
Law & Society, N.PAG.
John Paul II. (1997). Chastity and Homosexuality . Catechism of the Catholic Church: with modifications from the editio typica. (2nd ed., p. 2357). New York: Doubleday.
Lavely, V. A. (2007).The path to recognition of same-sex marriage: reconciling the inconsistencies between marriage and adoption cases.UCLA Law Review, 55(1), 247-291.
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (2012)Why civil unions are not enough
Onderko, Patty. "The same sex family next door." Parenting School Years 25.2 (2011):
62-65. Health Source - Consumer Edition. EBSCO. Web. 30 May 2011.
Rauch, J. (2004). Objections to these unions. Reason, 36(2), 36-43.
Mantilla, K. (2004). Gay Marriage: Destroying the Family To Save the Children?. Off
Our Backs, 34(5/6), 22-23.
Snyder, R. C. (2006). Gay marriage and democracy: equality for all. Lanham, Md.: Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers
Wainright, J. L., Russell, S. T., & Patterson, C. J. (2004). Psychosocial adjustment, school outcomes, and romantic relationships of adolescents with same-sex parents. Child
Development, 75(6), 1886-1898. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00823.x

References: Bradley, Richard R. "Making a mountain out of a molehill: a law and economics defense of same-sex foster care adoptions." Family Court Review 45.1 (2007): 133-148 Brumbaugh, S. M., Sanchez, L. A., Nock, S. L., & Wright, J. D. (2008). Attitudes toward gay marriage in states undergoing marriage law transformation Floyd, R. W. (2004). The gay agenda: it 's dividing the family, the church, and a nation. Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Press. Hull, K. (2004). Competing visions of law: civil unions in vermont. Conference Papers – Law & Society, N.PAG. John Paul II. (1997). Chastity and Homosexuality . Catechism of the Catholic Church: with modifications from the editio typica Lavely, V. A. (2007).The path to recognition of same-sex marriage: reconciling the inconsistencies between marriage and adoption cases.UCLA Law Review, 55(1), 247-291. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (2012)Why civil unions are not enough Onderko, Patty Rauch, J. (2004). Objections to these unions. Reason, 36(2), 36-43. Mantilla, K. (2004). Gay Marriage: Destroying the Family To Save the Children?. Off Our Backs, 34(5/6), 22-23. Snyder, R. C. (2006). Gay marriage and democracy: equality for all. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Wainright, J. L., Russell, S. T., & Patterson, C. J. (2004). Psychosocial adjustment, school outcomes, and romantic relationships of adolescents with same-sex parents Development, 75(6), 1886-1898. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00823.x