Same-sex marriage in Maryland
Marriage is an extremely fundamental component in the lives of diverse people. Modernity allows people to engage in even the most controversial of marriages. Same-sex marriages are relatively new and only liberalized people attempt to enrage in it. Either the marriage involves two women or two men who choose to live with each other as respective spouses. Maryland is among the few American regions that are uncertain about the practice of this category of marriages to its respective inhabitants.
The present legislation that favors the above marriage in Maryland is beneficial to the gay community of Maryland. It cannot be wrong or against fundamental teachings, that certain critics refer while making harsh judgments. The people in Mary land had permission to participate in any form of marriage that they wish regardless of their sex. This implies that the entire phenomena of this concept and across the world should be acceptable. This will endure that everyone in the respective populations of nations enjoys their rights (Cahill 42).
Rights are not the only elements that validate the legalization of same-sex marriages in Maryland. Other factors include the need to abolish past practices. Change allows people in Maryland to embrace new lifestyles in their lives. These new lifestyles include the engagement in sane sex marriages. When authoritative institutions in Maryland, illegalize the above practice they display an archaic picture. This is inappropriate for the creation of a perfect public perception of Maryland. There needs to be an acceptance of emerging trends that the people of Maryland wish to embrace. All this imply that same-sex marriages are not negative. Instead, they are normal occurrences that do not require such labels as controversy. There is minimal controversy of same-sex marriages in Maryland (Newton 49).
Some impacts of same-sex marriages make the phenomena to appear disheartening. People who choose to participate in such marriages compromise the family units that were traditionally fundamental. Families should include parents from both genders to apply their respective roles. Same-sex marriages deny this to their respective children. Such marriages make their children to develop inappropriate mannerism. They always lack perfect role models to guide them in the execution of societal expectations. Gay marriages should always involve advanced technologies if they are to bear children. If these marriages cannot use the advanced technologies, they must also involve other people who were not previously involved in the marriage. The inclusion of this other people tends to affect the structure of these gay marriages in Maryland (Stockland 39).
Apart from the above compromise on family, these same-sex marriages are undesirable. This promotes the practice of homosexuality in children who are growing up. The practice of gay marriages indicates that the entire notion is legal. This implies that even children will have the impression that it is right for them to practice homosexuality regardless of their ages. This is negative in the development of the society in Maryland. The negative impacts of homosexuality will compromise the performance of Maryland students (Klarman 56).
Maryland needs more time to determine whether it wishes it should make the marriage between people of same-sex be acceptable in the society. Alternatively, there should be certain conditions to the respective legislative clauses that concern gay marriages. All the relevant authorities in Maryland must engage in intense determination of the impacts associated with marriage between same-sex in the entire region.
Different States including Massachusetts, Connecticut and New York are among the states within the District of Columbia that allows same-sex marriage. Rhode Island and New Jersey do not allow the marriage between same-sex but they acknowledge it as performed in other jurisdictions. According to research conducted by Tully and Nicholas, Maryland’s attorney general implemented an opinion that stated that it was significant for Maryland to recognize same-sex marriage happening in other jurisdictions. By then, this opinion did not pass the law because in Maryland only the court rulings and enactments have the powers of legalizing marriages among same-sex couples. Tully and Nicholas assert that a law formed by the Maryland House of delegates 4o years ago did not allow marriage among same-sex couples. The authors claim the recent legislative action in Maryland sought to change the law. The new law redefined marriage from being amongst a man and woman to between two individuals (Vock 4).
Implementing the legislative proposal in Maryland came in at a period when many people were giving out opinion in favor of gay marriage. According to Vock (2012), the 2010 post poll in Washington found out that fifty-five percent of registered voters in Maryland encouraged a law that was in favor of marriage between same-sex, which was an increase from forty percent in 2007. Notably, on January 20, 2012 law makes came up with legislation that permitted between two people in Maryland and named it the Maryland Marriage Protection Act. According to the supporters this marriage type in Maryland, all men are equal making them to support the concept of equality. This makes the supporters of the same-sex marriage to believe that it is hypocritical to dent the rights of homosexual similar to the way it was hypocritical to dent the African Americans their freedom. Interestingly, the supporters insist that same-sex couples should get the privileges of accessing medical benefits and financial support similar to the heterosexual couples. This is because they believe that marriage is the only institution that can allow same-sex couple to get partner’s insurance benefits, social security and property inheritance among others. Same-sex marriage supporters in Maryland conclude that denying marriage rights to a gay couple is a form of minority discrimination (Vock 2).
On the contrary, individuals who are against the marriage base their claims on religion and personal values. According to the studies conducted by a group of religious believers in Maryland, homosexuality is a sin. The religious group believes that an introduction of marriage between same-sex would destroy the institution of marriage. A Scandinavian study pointed out that same-sex marriage lowered the rate o heterosexual marriage in dissimilar states. People who are against this marriage form, claim that legalization of the same-sex marriage will enhance polygamy and enhance divorce among the heterosexual couples. Notably, the anti same-sex individuals claim that encouraging divorce among heterosexual couples and polygamy is the main objective of the homosexual marriage. Furthermore, the significant argument used by the same-sex marriage protestors is that it weakens the marriage institution and family values within Maryland. The protestors consider sex marriage among same-sex insignificant because they believe that Maryland families form the bedrock of society and their weakening will decline the morals and values (Tully & Nicholas 3)
Work Cited
Cahill, Sean. Same-sex Marriage in the United States: Focus on the Facts. Lanham [u.a.: Lexington Books, 2004. Print.
Klarman, Michael J. From the Closet to the Altar: Courts, Backlash, and the Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Print.
Newton, David E. Same-sex Marriage: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2010. Internet resource.
Stockland, Patricia M. Same-sex Marriage. Edina, Minn: ABDO Pub, 2008. Print.
Tully, Meg, and Nicholas C. Stern. “Same-Sex Marriage Debate Ignites in Maryland State Senate.” McClatchy – Tribune Business NewsABI/INFORM Complete. Feb 24 2011. Web. 3 Dec. 2012 .
Vock, Daniel C. “Changing Black Attitudes could Boost Same-Sex Marriage in Maryland.” McClatchy – Tribune Business NewsABI/INFORM Complete. Oct 02 2012. Web. 3 Dec. 2012 .
