The debate on the ban of same-sex marriage has grown into a huge political controversy in the recent years. It is safe to say that the majority of people today support the ban of same-sex marriage. As of now, the ban of same-sex marriage looks like it will hold, but the LBGT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) community has taken baby steps towards completing their goal of allowing same-sex marriage. Now six states allow same-sex marriage: Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont. Also, Washington D.C. allows for same-sex marriage. Although this is only a small portion of the country, it took the LGBT community 7 years to get all of these states to allow same-sex marriage. Massachusetts was the first in 2004, and there has been a steady progression ever since. The debate has increased tremendously, as the LGBT community has been urging for a nation-wide support of gay marriage. Just as America experienced a long battle in the Civil Rights movement, I believe that America will see an even longer battle in the LGBT debate.
A big question for potential presidential candidates is their preference on same-sex marriage. Michele Bachmann, a potential Republican candidate, has made her preference on same-sex marriage pretty clear. She says that we should not allow this kind of marriage because homosexuality is seen as “sexual dysfunction” and “sexual identity disorders.” She does not stop there; instead she goes on to say that homosexuality will lead to “sexual anarchy.” Well from this we now know that if she were to run for president, which does not look promising at all right now, she would lose some votes to the LGBT community. Is it okay for a presidential candidate to say harsh things like this? Has she set a bad impression on the Republican Party with these comments?
Many LGBT advocators have contested her views and comments on homosexuality. Recently, a teenager from Iowa confronted Bachmann on her views on the LGBT community. In the video, the teenager brings up some very good points. First she asks Bachmann if she would support the LGBT community. Bachmann responded saying, “Americans have the same rights. We have the same civil rights. And so that’s really what government’s role is, is to protect our civil rights. There shouldn’t be any special rights or special sets of criteria based on people’s preferences.” Also, in response to the teen’s question if same-sex people can get married, Bachmann says that, “They can get married, but they abide by the same laws as everyone else.” What is really weird about this is that Bachmann says homosexuals can still marry, but a gay man must marry a women and a lesbian women must marry a man. Now how does that make any sense? Finally, the teenager brings up a very interesting point when she says, “So heterosexual couples have a privilege?”
My question is do heterosexuals really have a privilege in that they have the right to marry upon their preference? Is the law of the land that homosexuals cannot marry just? Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. says that a just law is one where the majority forces the minorities to follow, but the minority must also be willing to obey. He also says, along with St. Augustine, that “an unjust law is no law at all” (King Jr., 4). Since the minority, the LGBT community, is not willing to obey this law, does it make that law unjust? What do you think do heterosexuals really have a privilege? Is not allowing same-sex marriage unjust? Is the government doing its role in ensuring that everyone’s civil rights are protected? Do you think that gay marriage should be allowed? If the nation were to allow same-sex marriage would that be a privilege for same-sex people or would that be fair?