Should We Approve of Same Sex Marriage?

When I began my research I had already made up my mind in many areas, I did not feel that it was any one else's business what others did with their lives. While I do not feel that that has changed (my opinion) I am able now to see a much broader spectrum and from other points of views the reasons why it might not be correct at this time. I used scientific, medical, and religious data gleaned from multiple sources to provide a paper that answered many questions constantly brought up. The following is my response to the question should homosexual couples be allowed to marry, if not why? Anyhow, if so why?
Our current religious systems and majority religions tend to be very much against same sex relationships. These as a rule teach against it and call it many things, unnatural, sin, and sometimes try to break people of the habit so to speak. While all of this is accepted belief, it is not necessarily correct. As B.A. Robinson (of Religious Tolerance.Org) says 'Currently, only one man and one woman can be joined in matrimony and have their marriages recognized by the state," However even he admits later on that several states here in our country allow and perform ceremonies that legalize civil unions between homosexual couples. According to the Christian Bible we also see that it is outlawed (at least in the Old Testament) Leviticus 18:22 states "You [masculine] shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination" (NRSV) however in the New Testament we see a slightly different interpretation. I Timothy 1:10 use the wording (practicing) in definition of the life style. While in Corinthians 6:9 we see the wording for Effeminate used. So according to this religious opinion is it indeed wrong? Yes, most definitely, if you follow the tenants of the Bible and are a Christian it is wrong. However, one must remember the United States of America is a country where religious FREEDOM is and should always be practiced, and as Homosexuality is not a religious expression but is a lifestyle one must wonder why religion should have any say.

If we talk, pure numbers Christians make up a large percentage of the population here, however we have an equally large amount of voting power that is not.
Other religions such as Islam do have edicts against homosexual behavior as well. Sura 26:165 "What! Of all creatures do ye come unto the males" It is clear by what is written here that homosexuality is frowned on. As B.A. Robinson says on Religious Tolerance.Com, "A person's beliefs about homosexuality tend to be determined less by their religion, then where their beliefs lie on the liberal-conservative divide. For this reason, conservative Christians and Muslims tend to have similar beliefs about the nature and origin of homosexuality, as well as God's attitude towards homosexuals." If we look at Hindu the other major religion in the world we see "In general, "twice born" Hindus are prohibited from homosexual acts (maithunam pumsi), such as in Manusmrti 11:174, which mentions both men and women." Religion Facts.com
Religion (or the mainstream/ monotheistic religions) is very much against this expression of humanity; however is that the only reason we cannot accept that it is reality, that no matter what happens homosexuality exists and will continue to exist.

Historically homosexuality has been an accepted social practice; however, it seems that recently this view changed. Gilbert Herdt and Bruce Koff said in their paper How Homosexuality became stigmatized. "In an effort to promote procreation as the purpose for all sexual intimacy, early Christians condemned same-sex love along with other non procreative relationships." During early scientific endeavors following, the birth of Christianity homosexuality was classified as either a biological condition or mental disease. It was during the 1960's that these ideas were challenged; as a result many medical professionals are approaching homosexuality as a normal equation of human sexuality. The current issues regarding homosexual civil unions/ marriage are based in social norms that are being re written as we speak. Acceptance is not always possible though it is necessary to place this issue in a category separate from what is currently held as views, homosexuality is natural, it is not unnatural, and it is not a disease, or psychological problem. The social connotations are seldom looked at honestly. Many people assume that homosexual marriages will destroy the fabric of society without realizing that homosexual behavior is natural and more prevalent than previously thought. "In the early 1950s, for example, sociologist Clelland Ford and biologist Frank Beach showed that sexual practice varied enormously across a sample of many societies around the world. Homosexual practice was approved and permitted for some persons in more than 60 percent of the groups they surveyed." How Homosexuality Became Stigmatized, Gilbert Herdt and Bruce Koff. In fact, across the board, people in the United States of America have become far freer in their thought about homosexuals and the lifestyle portrayed. In history, we see many examples of homosexuality as an accepted stance in life, the Greeks, Romans, up and through Medieval Europe; we find many instances and writings in regards to homosexual relationships. Homosexuality has an ancient history in India. Ancient texts like Rig Veda (which dates back around 1500 BC), sculptures, and vestiges depict sexual acts between women as revelations of a feminine world where sexuality was based on pleasure and fertility. Interesting seeing as how according to their Vedas (scriptures) it is forbidden. Some people will bring up medical and historical aspects into this, some of that has been addressed previously however several articles as well as studies have been done in this regards. "Several thousand years of homosexual history, many cultures thought of it as do we of heterosexual relationships now. It was normal and natural." Foucault, Michel, and History of Sexuality, Vol I: An Introduction, (New York: Pantheon, 1978) Medically we find that homosexuality is not a disease, nor is it a psychological problem. It is a biological decision. It is something that you can indeed be born with, (the desire to be with the same sex). However it is also a result to some extant of environment. Christopher Wolfe, The Biological Research of Homosexuality stated, "These studies were designed to detect heritable variation, and if it was present, to counter the prevalent belief that sexual orientation is largely the product of family interactions and the social environment.... Although male and female homosexuality appears to be at least somewhat heritable, environment must also be of considerable importance in their origins."

This of course leads us to the next step, legality, and legal opinion in our courts today. Several court rulings recently overruled attempts to make it legal. In Massachusetts, it was ruled that civil unions fall below the legal definition of marriage, while in New Jersey it was ruled that they are equal. This disequilibrium is causing political waves across the country. In another recent publication, Nancy D. Polikoff cited a quote "Attorney Tom Stoddard justifies aggressively pursuing same-sex marriage on three bases. First, Stoddard cites practical reasons, including the right to obtain direct economic benefits (e.g. social security benefits, health insurance), the advantages of tax and immigration laws, and the protection of the relationship from outside interference." Here we find the main reason homosexual couples wish to get married, not to destroy the sanctity of marriage but to gain the legal, monetary and security that is a benefit of marriage. To not be allowed this is to deny basic Constitutional rights, those rights we use daily without even being aware we have them, the right to Equality. Every man (and woman) is equal as a citizen. Not allowing those that are not the same as us the equal privileges legally is bias and against everything, the Framers of our Constitution stood for. Civil Union/ Marriage should be allowed for homosexuals, "The government-limiting impulse motivating this view is admirable. However, in truth, the state's involvement in marriage is both inevitable and indispensable. Although many kinds of human pairings are possible, state-sanctioned marriage is, tautologically, the only one which binds couples together in the eyes of the law." (Let them wed. (Legal sanctioning of homosexual marriage)(Editorial)(Cover Story). (Jan 6, 1996) In The Economist (US), 338, p13 (2). Economically it is a sound decision as well, it enables couples that are not heterosexual to both contribute as a taxpaying couple and be able to make economic decisions for the other in their relationship should that need become available. Legal decisions would be easier for homosexual couples because they would be able to have the protection afforded through civil union/ marriage. For medical decisions it would no longer be necessary get consent the other in the couple could do that for them.
We should also look at where we also stand in regards to other countries. Over 16 first world nations have made homosexual civil unions/ marriages legal, and where does the United States fall here? "At a time when the legal recognition of gay and lesbian relationships has been proceeding apace in advanced industrial nations around the world (most notably, in Scandinavia, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Canada, Germany, and Hungary and partially or locally in Australia, Austria, Brazil, Colombia, Czech Republic, New Zealand, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom)," [Source: Adam, Barry D.] We do not fall anywhere on this list, other than we tend to think we are more important and better than they are. How is this possible with our backwards thinking regarding homosexuals and civil unions/ marriage still being so severely biased? I would hope that we as the largest and most advanced nation were capable of actually not having such extreme bias. Is it possible for us to move ahead as the other countries have and disregard old prejudices so that we can assume a more logical and unbiased stance on this issue?

"We the people of the United States of America..." Finish this for me and than tell me again why homosexual couples do not deserve the same benefits as heterosexuals. Even with everything, we have and everything this country stands for we still are keeping a positive part of society down merely because we do not want to give up old religious and or personal biases? Why can no one have the benefits currently held almost exclusively for heterosexual couples?
I truly feel that if an individual were to approach this from an unbiased point of view they would in fact end up understanding that it is unintelligent for us too continue suppressing the rights inherent in civil union/ marriage for all. In my opinion, we can ill afford to continue with our current course.

Adam, Barry D. (April 2003). The Defense of Marriage Act and American Exceptionlism: The "Gay Marriage" Panic in the United States
Journal of the History of Sexuality - Volume 12, Number 2,and pp. 259-276

Robinson, B.A. (1997 to 2007). Same-sex marriages (SSM) & civil unions. Copyright 1997 to 2007 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Latest update: 2007-APR-24

Robinson, B.A. (2005). ISLAM AND HOMOSEXUALITY: All VIEWPOINTS
1997 to 2005, by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance

Polikoff, Nancy D. (Oct., 1993). We Will Get What We Ask for: Why Legalizing Gay and Lesbian Marriage Will Not "Dismantle the Legal Structure of Gender in Every Marriage"
Virginia Law Review, Vol. 79, No. 7, Symposium on Sexual Orientation and the Law, pp. 1535-1550

Herdt, Gilbert and Koff, Bruce (2005). How Homosexuality Became Stigmatized. Contemporary Issues Companion: Gays and Lesbians. Ed. Kate Burns. San Diego: Greenhaven Press

Wolfe, Christopher (2004). The Biological Research on Homosexuality, excerpted from Homosexuality and American Public Life. S