Description

Same sex Marriage

How have opinions about same-sex marriage developed and changed from the 1970s through the early part of the twenty-first century?
While many attempts to earn societal recognition of same-sex unions through the 1970s were not successful, some local communities and private companies began recognizing such "domestic partnerships" through the 1980s. While some members of the gay and lesbian community continued to press for recognition of their unions as legal marriages, others in the community felt that marriage itself was a patriarchal and sexist institution with which they did not want to identify. Regardless of the divide, many people fighting for the cause believe that all members of the gay and lesbian culture should support same-sex marriage initiatives to present a united front on the issue.
In 2000 the Vermont legislature, in response to the 1999 state Supreme Court decision Baker v. State, established a set of guidelines to honor same-sex partners with privileges usually reserved for married couples. Several specific family laws, rights of inheritance, and state tax privileges became applicable to Vermont residents in same-sex partnerships. Further federal privileges were not, however, extended to Vermont same-sex couples. Subsequently, legislatures in California, Hawaii, and New Jersey passed similar provisions to honor same-sex unions. While the U.S. Constitution provides for "full faith and credit" to extend the laws of one state into others, the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act specifically prevented this extension to be granted in the case of same-sex partnerships.
In 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom required city clerks to validate same-sex marriages with licenses. His decision prompted other communities to do the same. The state of Massachusetts, in its Goodridge v. Department of Public Health ruling, cleared the way for state recognition of same-sex marriages in the same year.
Various groups have proposed challenges to such local and state rulings that would fortify the Defense of Marriage Act or put into place a marriage amendment. These movements intend to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman and invalidate the legal standing of same-sex partnerships. Such efforts have resulted in a diversity of opinion with some in the middle arguing that such decisions of family law should remain at the local and state level. Others have also challenged what they feel are motivations by religious groups with a vested interest in the marriage debate to blur the line between religion and politics.
Within the gay and lesbian culture, people continue to debate whether the community should press for federally sanctioned marriage. In Canada, where same-sex marriage was made legal in 2003, Kyle Rae, the city councilor in Toronto on the occasion of his same-sex wedding, stated, "For most of my activist life, marriage was seen as a ritual or relationship that had been denied to us. It was constructed as heterosexual and denied to my community. As the straight community held onto it, it became `Why would you want to [marry]?…' Now, my feeling is we have an opportunity to redefine marriage."



Resources:http://socialis sues.wiseto.com/Articles/ FO3020630117/







Homosexuality


The subject of homosexuality has often been surrounded by controversy. Much of the dispute centers on whether homosexuality and bisexuality should be treated as morally, socially, and legally equivalent to heterosexuality.
Theories on the Cause of Homosexuality
No single theory exists to explain the development of sexual orientation. The childhood trauma theory maintains that homosexuality is the result of an emotional shock during childhood. Another theory claims that homosexuality is a learned behavior. Still other explanations favor biological factors such as hormones and genes as the cause of homosexuality. Many scientists argue that a combination of biological factors and events at cri