For quite a considerable time during his time in office, President Obama has been very vocal about the rights of the gay community. On more than one occasions, he has openly come out clear that these individuals also have their rights and they need to be respected and allowed to enjoy those rights. In his stance, this is an issue related to civil rights (New York Times Editorial Para 1). However, this issue is hotly debated, with only a number of the states of the US having passed legislations which allow the gay people to enjoy their rights. This is quite embarrassing for a nation which is built on the tenets of democracy and freedom of choice. With regard to this issue, I feel that the legislative system in the land should acknowledge the fact that America is a matured democracy and the citizens should be allowed to make their own decisions. There should be no limit as to which decisions can be made individually or not, unless the decisions are a matter of national security. To the best of my understanding, the marriage issue, for instance, is not a matter in which people should be regulated. There are various incidences which prove that the Americans are in a position to, and need to be given their freedom of choice. Some of this evidence is as I mention in the paragraphs below.
First of all, it cannot be denied that the American Constitution gives individuals the freedom of choice. Well, this implies that the Americans have the right to do what they feel is right for them. The constitution also has it that there is no regulation that can be put in place which should overrule the basic human rights. The constitution acknowledges that American who are of age having the necessary information and abilities to make decisions which are best for them. As such, it gives the leeway where such individuals, having attained the constitutional age of independence and liability for their own lives, can make decisions which they feel are best for them. Unless such decisions have an impact on the rights of others or on the national security, there is no reason as to why they should not be allowed to exercise these rights. They are authorized by the law of the land to go on with no fear or intimidation. Well, this is the essence of democracy. Based on this analysis, it is arguable that the sexual orientation is one of the choices that an individual has to make in life. Any regulation or law which goes against this right arguably curtails the freedom of these individuals. As a matter of fact, such a regulation should not be enforced.
Another factor that has to be observed is that gay rights are not just an issue of interest in America. Rather, it is a debate that is spread all over the world. For instance, there is the case of the Welsh secretary who came under fire for speaking negatively about the gay community (Jones and Wintour 1). This indicates that the global society has moved from the conservative nature to the modern thinking. There is clearly no reason as to why some members of the society should be looked down upon simply because their values or attributes are not conventional. After all, change is one of the factors of life that we as humans have to deal with. I do not see the reason as to why the pioneers of this change in the society should be looked down upon or despised. After all, they are just living their lives in the best way they know. They do not have to apologize to anyone and neither do they owe anyone an explanation. After all, there are a lot of heterogeneous relationships and marriages which do not work out. Cases of divorce are an every day occurrence and there are instances of spouse abuse. Domestic violence is also a common phenomenon amongst the heterogeneous relationships and marriages. Definitely, all these are social vices which need to be avoided. If such cases are found within what is termed as the ‘social order’, I do not see the reason as to why gay marriages and relationships should be termed as ‘out of order.’ In as much as they might not be perfect, there is a similar lack of perfection in the heterosexual or straight relationships. After all, some of them are even more stable. Therefore, the small speck amongst the gay community should not be exaggerated whereas the wrongs in the other kinds of relationships are overlooked. This is unfair.
One factor that has to be note is that the debate on the gay marriages becomes even hotter due to the existence of some legislation which tends to go against these forms of social arrangements. For instance, there is the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which was enforced with the aim of protecting marriages. This is one of the regulations which have led to a big blow to the rights of the gay people. According to Capehart (Para 1), there Act defines a marriage as a relationship between people of opposite genders. Well, this implies that individuals who are in a same-sex relationship stand no chance of being declared legal. Well, does this really put into consideration the rights of these individuals? The constitution clearly spells out the fact that there should be no regulation which contradicts the rights of the American citizens. However, here comes a regulation which does exactly that; curtailing the freedom of choice for the gay community. At this point, one tends to wonder whether the gay people are not under the protection of the law, and if so, why a regulation such as the DOMA could have found its way to implementation. Well, there might be an argument that when the Act was enforced there were no issues with the gay communities. If this is used as the excuse, then time has come to correct the wrongs. It is time to make sure that all the American citizens are under equal protection of the law and that none are discriminated against simply because they have unique choices in life.
There is significant evidence that the time for change has come. Even the leaders in the high positions have to acknowledge that change is inevitable. Better still, the individuals who, in the past, acted in an arrogant manner towards the gay community are coming to account for what they did. For instance, Landler (Para 1) observes that Chuck Hagel, who was a former senator for Nebraska and who was poised as one of the individuals who stood a chance t be elected as defense secretary by President Obama had a hard time. He was brought under fire for having openly spoken against a diplomatic appointee on the basis that he was gay. Well, this indicates that any form of violence or discrimination against the gay people does not go unnoticed. They are our brothers, sisters, parents, and even friends. Why then, should a brother turn against a brother simply because of their sexual orientation? After all, these people do not force anyone to join them. They only go on with their lives the best way they know how. More often than not, they are law abiding citizens who actually pay their taxes to the government and do everything that pertains to the citizenship of America. Well, it is actually very unfair to judge them so wrongly and this should not be tolerated.
Lastly, I must argue that there are quiet a lot of Americans out there who share the same sentiments as I. Every day, there are states coming up and giving the gay people their rights. The most recent on the list is the Illinois Senate which, on the Valentine’s Day, voted to legalize the same-sex marriage (Yaccino Para 1). This has been the trend for the past couple of years where the Americans have pushed their representatives to pass bills that allow the same-sex marriages. There is a wave which cannot be easily stopped, the wave for liberation of the gay community against social discrimination and discrimination by the law. This is a trend that has to be appreciated. It shows that the nation gets to appreciate the rights of the people, that the decisions of the people have to be respected, and that the law has to apply equally to all. We are all Americans, and we need to live as such. We should not let misguided pieces of legislation to lead us against our brothers or to discriminate against some of our own. As the founding fathers of the nation had the dream for a free America, let the same be seen in all aspects of our lives; whether social, financial, political and any other front. The rights of all the people should be respected and this starts with the citizens appreciating the simple fact that everyone’s rights have to be respected.
Annotated Bibliography
Capehart, Jonathan. “Americans are done with DOMA.” The Washington Post, February 19, 2012.
This is a report about a polls opinion which was carried out in relation to the rights of the gay community. The report was built around the ideas of people from different backgrounds, regardless of their race, gender, or political affiliations. All that was needed is to have the people give their opinions considering the issue of same sex marriages, with reference to the DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). An overwhelming number of the Americans felt that the Act was not right since it went against the rights of the gay people. The main bone of contention lay in the fact that the Act defines marriage as a relationship between people of different genders. Definitely, this does not consider the gay communities.
This article is important in the argument since it helps in asserting the fact that Americans appreciate and have a respect for the rights and freedoms of all. As such, there is no reason as to why some people should be discriminated against.
Capehart, Janathan. “Supreme Caution on Court Gay Marriage.” The Washington Post, December 11, 2012.
This was an article written by an analyst of the social issues. It details the dilemma that the country was thrown into as the Supreme Court was set to listen to two cases which were related to the issues of same sex marriage. The country was thrown in the dark since there was no clear direction as to which side the court would rule for. The dilemma lay in the fact that the DOMA went against a gay marriage. However, here were cases where the ruling of the court could either favor the marriages or go against them. Whichever the decision taken, there was the possibility of going against the law. If it ruled for the marriage, then the DOMA would have been rendered irrelevant. If it ruled against the marriages, then the rights of the individuals would have been neglected. This article shows the dilemma that the society gets into when it fails to be considerable for all the people it has. Therefore, it asserts that the society should avoid being in such situations by considering and upholding the rights of all.
Editorial. “Beyond Selma-to-Stonewall.” New York Times, January 27, 2013.
This editorial article reiterates president Obama’s efforts at making sure that the rights of the gay community yare upheld. This article also brings up a new perspective to the argument, where it argues that the issue on gay marriages is a matter of civil rights. It goes on to emphasize on the president’s remarks with regard to the manner in which the gay people have been discriminated in the past, and the reason as to why they need to be given a break. There are also some statistics which indicate the states that have adopted the single sex marriages.
This article is also a major boost to this argument. It helps in showing that the gay people have been trying for along time to get recognized and allowed to go on with their lives. It is an indication that their cry has finally reached the right ears, as the administrators start to pay heed to their cries.
Jones, Sam, & Wintour, Patrick. “Welsh Secretary Criticized for Speaking against Gay Couples Raising Children.” The Guardian, 15th February 2013.
This article details the criticism which was thrown towards David Jones, a Welsh secretary who had argued that gay people were not capable of providing a good environment for bringing up children. This assertion was taken negatively by the majority of the community, which eventually forced Mr. Jones to withdraw his earlier statement.
Well, the article is a good indication that the society is becoming more sensitive to the issue surrounding the gay marriages. The stigma and discrimination against them has greatly worn off and it is time that the members of the society acknowledge this. Even the leaders in the government have to appreciate this fact and make sure that they do not engage in any form of exchanges which might be misconstrued for arguments against the gay community.
Landler, Mark. “Possible Defense Nominee Faulted for Record on Gays.” New York Times, December 20, 2012.
The reporter in this article tells of the challenges that faced the nominee for the defense secretary post, Mr. Chuck Hagel. In as much as he might have had a good track record and was even considered by President Obama for the position, his past history in relation to the gay marriages came back haunting him. He was criticized for having come out openly against a gay diplomat, arguing that such an individual could not have bee allowed to take up such a position. This report helps in indicating that the Americans have not been oblivious to the struggle of the gay community to get acceptance into the community. Well, the individuals who had acted as a barrier to this integration have to sweat it out as the wave of liberation sweeps them off their feet and throws them off balance.
Yaccino, Steven. “Illinois Senate Votes to Back Gay Marriage.” The New York Times, February 14, 2013.
This article reports on the decision that was made by the Illinois senate to vote for the legalization of gay marriages. The bill gathered a 34-21 vote, which indicates that the majority of the senators actually felt that it was right to allow the gay people to enjoy their freedom just as the heterosexual individuals. The article also has it that this vote was not only a victory for the same sex marriages, but a sign that the community has actually changed and has accepted the same sex marriages. This article is important in the argument as it helps in asserting the fact that the American citizens acknowledge and appreciate the rights of their fellow citizens. They have chosen to bury their conservative nature and embrace the new order of the society.
Works Cited
Capehart, Jonathan. “Americans are done with DOMA.” The Washington Post, February 19, 2012.
Capehart, Janathan. “Supreme Caution on Court Gay Marriage.” The Washington Post, December 11, 2012.
Editorial. “Beyond Selma-to-Stonewall.” New York Times, January 27, 2013.
Jones, Sam, & Wintour, Patrick. “Welsh Secretary Criticized for Speaking against Gay Couples Raising Children.” The Guardian, 15th February 2013.
Landler, Mark. “Possible Defense Nominee Faulted for Record on Gays.” New York Times, December 20, 2012.
Yaccino, Steven. “Illinois Senate Votes to Back Gay Marriage.” The New York Times, February 14, 2013.
