Gay Marriage Annotated Bibliography

Introduction

The United States believes in the separation of church and state. The United States also is a god-fearing country as seen by a multitude of historical events, as well as many common phrases and ideals. The clash of these two ideas is epitomized in the debate over same-sex marriages. It is a clash of beliefs and concepts, the struggle between social equality and cultural expectations. The papers annotated below shed light on multiple aspects of the debate. They include answering the question of what is causing the debate, how same-sex couples are handling what they believe to be injustice, what same-sex couples would gain by being able to marry, and what would need to be done to overcome barrier against providing equality and justice to a minority of this nation.

Annotated Bibliography

Chambers, D. (1996). What if? the legal consequences of marriage and the legal needs of lesbian and gay male couples. Michigan Law Review, 95(2), 447-491.

In America, married individuals are treated differently than individuals who are single by providing them with legally recognized relationships and parenting options that others do not have. Overall, the institution of marriage has significant advantages to offer which allows couples to experience a life from which they can derive personal satisfaction. Chambers proposes that if marriage is not going to be comprehensive in its inclusion of homosexual couples that there needs to be some kind of legal alternative that same-sex couples can pursue, which would grant them the same protections, benefits, and opportunities as marriage does. For example, by allowing same-sex couples to register with their state as ‘domestic partners’ who then become eligible for the same privileges that married couples are entitled to. Other countries, such as Denmark and Norway, have adopted these kinds of legal amendments and treat registered same-sex partners the same as married couples for economic purposes. However, these countries have still not allowed same-sex couples equal opportunities for any laws that apply to parenting and adoption.

Cherlin, A. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 848-861.

Andrew Cherlin argues that marriage in American society has become de-institutionalized. He believes that social norms allow people to live without having to succumb to questions about their actions or the actions of others, thus creating greater social stability. However, during periods of social change, individuals are no longer able to depend on the shared universal understandings of how to behave and must undergo the process of negotiating new ways of thinking and acting. These negotiations generate both conflict and opportunity. The pressure by same-sex marriages to develop new rules has so far created a lot of disagreement and moral tension between the two opposing parties. However, by breaking down the old rules that have traditionally defined the institution of marriage, more equal and fair relationships can be created between husbands and wives. Without the impact of legalizing same-sex marriage, marriage will likely be rivaled and devalued by cohabitation, which has become a socially acceptable alternative to getting married. Cohabitation between romantic partners is sometimes pursued as a trial marriage; however, there has been an increase in the number of partners who pursue cohabitation without the intent to go married. Additionally, some places like Canada have placed more value on cohabitation with the Benefits and Obligations Act of 2000, which eliminated distinctions between married and unmarried homosexual and heterosexual couples who had lived together at least one year so far. Overall, research shows that the meaning of marriage has changed and is now viewed within a very different context than it has been in the past to allow people to achieve greater satisfaction in their personal lives. There are more forms of marriage as well as marriage alternatives that are becoming just as socially acceptable as traditional marriage. Additionally, the roles within marriage are starting to become much more flexible and negotiable to allow people to make the decisions necessary for pursuing their interests.

Friedman, A. (2013). The necessity for state recognition of same-sex marriage: Constitutional requirements and evolving notions of family. Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice, 3(1), 134-170.

The majority of Americans consider the traditional role of the family to be the core indivisible unit of organization in society. The reason that the family is thought to be so important is due to their ability to teach and transmit the most important values of culture and society. However, though marriage is typically the ideal highest form of a romantic relationship and the beginning of a family, there is evidence that fewer Americans in today’s society are pursuing marriage. Furthermore, many married couples are seeking out divorces from their partners. Due to the increasing amount of those who do not pursue marriage, different varieties of alternative forms of relationships are being pursued instead. These include single-parent families, group living, and unmarried cohabitation. Interestingly, these alternative relationships seem to preserve the valuable roles and qualities associated with traditional families, such as shared values between partners, commitment, and affection. In comparison to the typical heterosexual couple, homosexual couples are just as if not more successful in maintaining a committed romantic relationship. Additionally, due to the advancement and increasing accessibility of new reproductive technologies, same-sex couples are now able to create and raise children. Therefore, to keep up with the social reforms in current American society, the legal system must evolve and acknowledge homosexual couples as deserving of the same rights as heterosexual couples. Additionally, the focus has been placed on an individual’s constitutional right to privacy, which includes protection for their rights to marriage, family, and children. Despite the current lack of legal protection and social support of homosexual relationships and same-sex marriages, gay men and lesbians are still proceeding to honor their committed relationships, build families, and raise children together. Due to the best interest of these couples and their children, the negative stereotypes about homosexuality need to be dissolved.

Herdt, G., & Kertzner, R. (2006). I do, but I can't: The impact of marriage denial on the mental health and sexual citizenship of lesbians and gay men in the United States. Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, 3(1), 33-49.

Marriage in the United States remains a mostly heterogeneous institution, but the impact of homosexual relationships has created a complex profile for the concept of marriage. Cultural developments marked by ethnic, regional, and socioeconomic differences have called for changes in the traditional definition of marriage. Other movements, such as the women’s movement, have also critiqued marriage as an out of date patriarchal institution that has continued to contribute to the social oppression of women, and sometimes men as well. There is an increasing need to define marriage without the need of patriarchal domination for one partner over another. History shows that marriage has allowed men to have control over the reproductive activities of women and have not always respected values of love, happiness, and personal choice. Therefore, the right for homosexuals to get married and have their relationships legally recognized has had a significant impact in the fight for equality in the United States. Many people believe that there should be equal access to marriage by all types of people as a fundamental basic human right in American society. There should not be any kind of discrimination based on gender or psychological functioning of both homosexual and heterosexual couples. Additionally, advocates of equality are focusing on how denying access to marriage can have harmful psychological and social repercussions for gay men and lesbian women. Historical evidence documents the institution of marriage as a central part of being human and has always been considered a fundamental component of citizenship and participating in social life. Moreover, marriage has been proven to lead a romantic couple towards greater social engagements in their community and facilitate the assumption of greater rights and duties. In the United States, modern marriage allows couples to experience the full privileges of citizenship in addition to providing the opportunity to expand families and kinship. Other cultures associate marriage as a necessary part of a person’s transition into adulthood. Additionally, marriage and parenting children are considered prerequisites for knowledge, achieving greater power, and experiencing most social privileges. History has also played a large role in shaping views towards homosexuality. In the past, homosexuality in the United States was treated as a sin, crime, disease, and abominable form of abnormal mental functioning. These cultural stereotypes are still present in today’s society, which contributes to the belief that homosexuals are immoral and abnormal human beings. The inability for them to get married and honor their romantic partners has only served to further damage their reputation in society by making their relationships appear as less genuine than those of married heterosexual couples. However, research shows that these negative stereotypes have no scientific or logical justifications and that they can be very damaging to the well being of homosexual couples as well as their children. Marriage, therefore, is a critical method of authenticating personal identity and intimate relationships.

Herek, G. M. (2006). Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the united states: A social science perspective. American Psychologist, 61(6), 607-621.

The recent rise of the human potential movement, which has placed a growing emphasis on self-fulfillment and the process of developing a personal identity has become a very important part of making life decisions in the United States. This includes the decision to get married and has called for marriage to be evaluated following more individualistic criteria that redefine marital satisfaction to include self-fulfillment and self-expression. Therefore, marriage has started to break away from the traditional prescribed gender and spousal roles. When homosexual people in the United States began to make their sexual orientation public and form communities to help end discrimination based on sexuality in the 1970s, they were immediately met with opposition from conservative and religious parties, however, in the years since then, attitudes towards same-sex marriage have become much more tolerant. Statistics from Gallup Polls show that the number of individuals who believe that homosexual couples should have the right to marry one another increased by 25% from 1988 to 2005, and research indicates that the number of these individuals is likely to continue increasing each year as homosexuality becomes more socially acceptable. Additionally, research that reveals how similar same-sex couples are to different-sex couples has helped to justify the legitimacy of same-sex relationships. For instance, both same-sex and different-sex couples want to form stable relationships that are long-lasting, and that both types of couples are completely capable of successfully doing so. Furthermore, homosexual couples form the same deep, emotional romantic attachments that heterosexual couples do, and also face the same challenges throughout their committed relationships. As research has continued to progress in areas of gender equality and homosexuality, the questions about begun to shift from gender to the role that marriage has in a relationship. Research now seeks to address whether marriage has a psychologically transformative effect on the romantic partners and whether the benefits of other forms of legal relationships, such as civil unions, can be comparable to the benefits of marriage.

Hull, K. E. (2003). The cultural power of law and the cultural enactment of legality: The case of same-sex marriage. Law and Social Inquiry, 28(3), 629-657.

Kathleen E. Hull discusses how same-sex couples must work around the multifaceted systems emplaced within the United States today. In particular, the legal, social and communal (i.e. religious) aspects that same-sex couples must work with or around to overcome difficulty; each of these three pillars provides potential benefit or adversity in regards to establishing the concept of same-sex marriage. Of the three, the legal aspect provides the most hardship, as without acceptance or recognition from the state, the legitimacy of same-sex marriage does not truly exist. Only with the acceptance and recognition from the law, does validity occur. With this validity come the protections and benefits that are entrusted to heterosexual marriages. In addition to these legal benefits, by having the law recognize same-sex marriages, a sense of normality that is not currently present can begin to develop culture-wide. For many homosexual couples, this concept of normality: being like everyone else, and being able to have long term, meaningful relationships, is as important to them as are the financial and legal benefits. The spectrum of involvement to achieve justice outside the law varies from couples involved in the study. Taking into account the complexity of social, legal and communal levels, categorizing couples into three different types. Some believe in the literalism behind the law, and work within the law, not making any efforts to emulate titles or conditions not granted to them, believing it is pointless to have same-sex marriages if the legal protections and benefits of marriage are not provided. Due to the lack of legal support on by the state, many couples have looked outside the legal system to claim legitimacy on their relationships. The second type of couple work near the parameters law, using common terminology such as “husband,” “wife,” and “married,” to connect more sociably with those around them, recognizing short-comings of legality, but establishing that normality that is still very foreign to the nation’s culture. Then some work outside the law, who do go to other sources to find legality, many of these couples go to religious institutions to find legality outside the law. Others turn to public ceremony to establish a social reality not accepted by either a religious organization or the law. All couples studied do attempt to stay as close to the law as possible, and most couples studied do vary between the three types depending on situation and circumstance. The perpetuating need to work outside the law is due to the individual's want for equality and justice within the legal system. There is a strong belief that fairness is inherent in the stipulations of the law. There is also the belief that with the passing of laws, social and cultural equality will follow, as more same-sex couples will be able to experience both a legal and cultural ceremony that was denied to them. Hull does point out the innocence of this hope, as historical milestones within the nation’s civil-rights movement have always been met with harsh and violent opposition.

Olson, L. R., Cadge, W., & Harrison, J. T. (2006). Religion and public opinion about same-sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 340-360.

Religious congregations provide both a social and political platform to spread a message to the American culture. Politically, religious congregations can receive information and opinion from closely connected statesmen, as a push to have members follow within a political mindset, rallying behind a religiously supported idea for political candidates. This was seen in the 2000 election when the Republican Party pushed, as a point of contention, the Democrat’s open stance on same-sex marriage. This push by religious institutions did aid with the electing of President George W. Bush. Similarly, the community that comes from congregations establishes social trends within the nation. Working not only on a network of parishioners but on a network of friends as well, congregations can cohere followers to follow ideas through the concepts of peer influence and the desire to support their religious establishment. Though not all creeds are against same-sex marriages, a substantial majority of religious institutions oppose marriage equality, this study producing empirical data to support this claim. The cultural influence of religious institutions does affect the future of same-sex marriages within the nation. Only when religious institutions and followers change their opinion on same-sex marriage will there be a socially acceptable avenue for homosexual couples to be considered “normal” within the parameters of society.

Polikoff, N. (1993). We will get what we ask for: why legalizing gay & lesbian marriage will not "dismantle the legal structure of gender in every marriage". Virginia Law Review, 79(7), 1535-1550.

Attorney Tom Stoddard believes that homosexuals should have the right to get married for three main reasons. The first is that it allows couples the right to acquire many economic benefits, such as health insurance, tax advantages, and social security benefits. Additionally, marriage allows for homosexual couples to be able to validate the significance of their romantic relationships in the same way as heterosexual couples. Finally, Stoddard states that a couple’s desire to get married should not require the approval of the state of the nation, which does not have the right to interfere or deny romantic relationships or marital satisfaction. Furthermore, Stoddard believes that the impact of same-sex marriage will be a significant step on the path to a world that is free of discrimination. Discrimination against gay men and lesbian women based on their choice in sexuality is starting to be recognized as a form of injustice in American society, which should be accepting of personal differences that deviate from the norms of mainstream culture. Political and religious conservatives who remain in opposition to same-sex marriages often argue that allowing homosexual couples the legal right to be married will negatively alter the sanctity of the institution of marriage. However, though allowing same-sex marriages will have a large impact on society, the changes they facilitate will have positive rather than negative repercussions for the definition of marriage by eliminating limitations imposed by gender and spousal roles. Research has shown that when two men or two women are married that one partner still usually assumed the characteristics as well as social and familial responsibilities typically associated with those of the opposite gender. Therefore, both same-sex partners still acted out the traditional gender roles throughout their relationship. This evidence shows that gender roles are illogical and that an individual can assume the typical roles associated with each gender. Therefore, same-sex marriage may be the key in allowing both men and women to experience more personal freedom in their relationships despite whether they are between same-sex or different-sex couples. In heterosexual couples, it would become more socially acceptable for a man to stay at home to raise the children and maintain the home while a woman actively pursues a career and provides financial stability. Breaking down gender roles in this way would allow people to have greater freedom in pursuing their interests instead of feeling coerced to complying with the limitations that gender roles have previously imposed. Additionally, same-sex marriage will encourage people to look for similarities between their romantic relationships and marriages and be an important part of alleviating discrimination in the future.

Conclusion

The debate over same-sex marriage stems from religious concerns over the sanctity of the institution of marriage, a concern of most of the nation, and reflected within the halls of state legislations nationwide. Same-sex marriages continue to be a foreign or taboo to a majority of the nation today, though now some states have legally accepted marriage equality. On the national mindset, same-sex marriage is still outside of the normal society, an unusual union that goes outside the deeply set Judeo-Christian beliefs that are a driving force behind the national mindset. Not only will same-sex couples continue to be classified as obtuse by the nation, they will continue to struggle for the same legal, economic and social benefits found in a heterosexual marriage until such point that overwhelming religious majority changes its views on the topic. Until such a time that the majority of the nation is ready to accept equal marriage rights and benefits by the homosexual community, the struggle and debate will continue to occur.