Hennepin County, Minnesota saw the dawn of the fight for same-sex marriage equality in March of 1967 when Jack Baker asked his boyfriend, Michael McConnell, to marry him. The couple fully realized the zealotry of their proposal yet stood firm against the ‘valuable’ conventions of the time. They were well versed in the condescending hatred exhibited towards gays; both men had been fired from their jobs for their sexuality. Gays and their allies were so overwhelmed by the stringent denial to live openly and safely that attaining progress towards equality in marriage seemed unfeasible. Lamentably, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Baker and McConnell’s request for a marriage license. Decades later, still a couple, the two have lived to witness the seventeen states that have fully legalized same-sex marriage on constitutional grounds (Condon). Yet with the majority of states still denying gays their rights, the fight for equality has only begun. The arguments in opposition to same-sex marriage derive from a prejudiced and erroneous rationale; the government must legalize it nationwide to adhere to the same virtue of equality that the United States was built upon.

The opponents of gay marriage have put forth a multitude of illogical arguments in a virulent attempt to deny gays their rights. The most rudimentary of which asserts that homosexuality is neither natural nor normal. No concrete evidence has been put forth to validate this claim, but widespread substantiation suggests that one is born with his or her sexuality. An evolutionary biologist at the University of California Santa Barbara finds that epigenetics can help explain homosexuality. Epi-marks, highly varied layers of information that control how specific genes are expressed, generally disappear between generations. But in homosexuals, the epi-marks are present, passed either from father to daughter or mother to son. The epigenetic theory illustrates dissimilarities between family members and explains the rarity of homosexual identical twins. If homosexuality was solely genetic, then scientists would expect that the trait would eventually vanish as gays do not reproduce (Koebler).

Studies also find a correlation between birth order and sexuality. A woman’s fetus accumulates antibodies during her first pregnancy. A male fetus builds male antibodies that affect the development of subsequent children; boys are approximately 33% more likely to be homosexual for each older brother. Scientists negate the idea that homosexuality is attributed to a lack of testosterone or estrogen, but they find that one’s central nervous system, which mediates physiological responses to these hormones, affects sexual orientation (Lawrence).
In addition, homosexuality is present in the animal kingdom. All dwarf chimpanzees, who are closely related to humans, are bisexual; sex is critical in diverting from violence and solving conflicts. Male lions congregate to lead prides and have sex to ensure loyalty and strengthen bonds. Scientists have observed gay dolphin and killer whale couples that have stayed together for years. In all, over 1,500 animal species exhibit homosexual behavior. The proof of homosexuality’s naturalness is strong (“1,500 Animal Species”). Regardless, disbelievers must ask themselves – who would choose to be gay in a malicious society that condemns it? Homosexuality is not a ‘hip’ cultural trend but a part of biology prevalent throughout the world’s history.

Religion plays a major role in the stigmatization of homosexuality as the Bible pronounces that it is against pure ideals. Members of the Christian faith who oppose gay marriage frequently cite the Bible as a ‘credible’ source. Yet they turn a blind eye to the absurdity of some of the Bible’s laws and blatant irrelevance of them to modern society. For example, the bible mandates “For six days work is to be done, but the seventh day is a day of Sabbath rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day is to be put to death” (Exodus 31:15). Perhaps to ensure morality in our society, organizations should not only protest gay pride marches but also the entirety of the NFL (although not on Sunday!). The Bible also invokes the death sentence on those who: cheat on their spouse, curse their father or mother, or practice a different religion, (Leviticus 20:10, 20:9, Deuteronomy 17:2-7). It prohibits shaving, wearing clothing made with more than one fabric, and eating animal fat (Leviticus 19:27, 19:19, and 3:17). This might seem strict, but not to worry - it is perfectly acceptable to beat your slaves (Exodus 21:20-21)! The fact that some Christians ignore dozens of these biblical laws and focus only on those concerning homosexuality exposes the incontrovertibly prejudiced nature of their attack on gay rights.

Biblical evidence cannot reasonably substantiate the illegalization of gay marriage as it does not govern common law. The United States runs on the principle that church and state must remain separate. It is a country of highly varied ethnicities and faiths that promises that individuals of any diverse background can live freely and safely. But, some Christians fail to realize that the guaranteed freedom of religion does not condone the expectation that society has to conform to their religious beliefs. Muslim women wear their hijabs with faithful pride, yet they do not condemn the millions of American women who lack them to death. Likewise, gays will not have their constitutional right to prosperity torn from them based on another group’s beliefs – it is simply not the way of the country.

Proponents of the ban on gay marriage argue that the purpose of marriage is to have children; America has to maintain the ‘sanctity’ of marriage. This position fails to consider the development of the definition of marriage in society over time. Centuries ago, in a Catholic dominated Europe, marriages paralleled business transactions. Love took a backseat to familial interests; gaining financial assets and marrying ‘up’ the social hierarchy were principal concerns. As society progressed, love blossomed through as the prime intent of couples tying the knot. Those who resist-same sex marriage resist the natural flow of society; as the world progresses, so does the definition of marriage as it has done throughout history. Urging for marriage in the ‘sacrosanct’ traditional sense encourages social stagnation.

Besides, what merit does the ‘sanctity of marriage’ possess, anyway? Traditional Catholicism defines marriage as a lifelong bond between a man and a woman for the sole purpose of procreation. Many couples fail to adhere to the essential tenets of this doctrine. Around 50% of American marriages end in divorce – one every 36 seconds. This amounts to 2,400 divorces per day and 876,000 divorces per year. The average length of a marriage ending in a divorce is 8 years – hardly a ‘lifelong bond’. Ironically, Baptists hold the title for highest divorce rate among U.S. religious groups. The rate of divorce among same-sex couples is less than half that of heterosexual couples. Celebrities undeniably tarnish the sanctity of marriage – Zsa Zsa Gabor has married nine times while Britney Spears divorced Jason Alexander after 55 hours of marriage (Irvin). And yet gay weddings, pride parades, and rallies are the events protested for threatening virtuous religious ideals.

Beyond the attack on homosexuals’ effects on the purity of marriage, some individuals argue that same-sex marriages threaten the safety of children and their families. They assert that a child requires maternal and paternal influence to thrive. However, 43% of children growing up in America today are raised without their fathers (Irvin). Our president Barack Obama was raised by a single mother – and he does just fine. University of Southern California sociologist Tim Biblarz concludes that no significant differences exist between children of gay or straight parents. In fact, gay parents have to dedicate themselves to planning their children and therefore commit themselves to the child entirely, giving them an edge over heterosexual parents with unplanned children. The only prominent difference between children of gay and straight parents is that of tolerance; kids of homosexual parents are statistically more empathetic, open-minded, and tolerant. Unfortunately, the one disadvantage to same-sex parenting has to do with society’s reaction towards the family; opponents of gay marriage harm the well-being of the children they claim to be so concerned about in their hateful argument (Pappas).

The malice exhibited towards gays in our society proves to have detrimental effects on our youth. Central to these effects is the bleak outlook on the future for homosexual kids – how can one remain optimistic without the promise of the right to marry in the future? Contradictory to the ‘for the kids’ premise that some people advocate in their argument against gay marriage, negative attitudes of homophobes towards LGBT youth puts them in mental and physical duress. Eight of ten LGBT students have been verbally harassed at school while four of ten have been physically harassed. 60% report feeling unsafe at school. They are twice as likely to have attempted suicide in comparison to heterosexual children. Legalizing gay marriage would encourage more acceptance towards homosexuals and offer hope for kids struggling because of their sexuality ("Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Health”). In fact, same-sex marriage is legal in CNN’s top five happiest countries in the world (Hetter). If those against gay marriage truly care for the prosperity of our youth, then perhaps they should put aside prejudice and selflessly re-evaluate their goals for society in the best interests of the children’s futures.

The lack of hard statistical or scientific evidence that would refute the rationale for gay marriage suggests prejudice in the opposition. A study on people’s reasons for opposing gay marriage finds that 12% of respondents oppose it because they “just do not agree with it”. 4% said they “don’t know” (“Main Reasons for Opposing”). Resistance without even an attempt at reasoning insinuates that opponents refuse to put aside their personal bias for the happiness of others; their hate parallels that of racists and sexists. Yet bias cannot bar justice and equality forever - 17 states have legalized same-sex marriage on a constitutional basis with many more to come. But the arduous process must be expedited through federal intervention – a constitutional amendment. Some might argue that this strips the states of their rights, but the states are not entirely independent. They are bound by documents like the constitution which objectively advocate for equality; federal intervention is warranted to fix issues dissonant with the virtues that America was built upon just as it was with women’s right to vote and black civil rights. For the prosperity of society, our government must legalize gay marriage nationwide.

Works Cited
Condon, Patrick. ".Minn. Gay Couple in '71 Marriage Case Still United." AP. Associated Press, 10 Dec. 2012. Web. 26 Mar. 2014. <http://bigstory.ap.org/article/minn-gay-couple-71-marriage-case-still-joined>.
"1,500 Animal Species Practice Homosexuality." Medical Science News. News Medical, 23 Oct. 2006. Web. 25 Mar. 2014. <http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx>.
Hetter, Katia. "Get Happy In The World's Happiest Countries." CNN. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Apr. 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/20/travel/happiest-countries-to-visit/>.
Irvin, McKinley. "32 Shocking Divorce Statistics." McKinley Irvin. N.p., 30 Oct. 2012. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. <http://www.mckinleyirvin.com/blog/divorce/32-shocking-divorce-statistics/>.
Koebler, Jason. "Scientists May Have Finally Unlocked Puzzle of Why People Are Gay." US News. N.p., 11 Dec. 2012. Web. 25 Mar. 2014. <http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/12/11/scientists-may-have-finally-unlocked-puzzle-of-why-people-are-gay>.
Lawrence, Georgia. "The Science of Homosexuality." Serendip Studio. Brywn Mawr, 13 Nov. 2006. Web. 25 Mar. 2014. <http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/33>.
"Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Health." Center for Disease Control and Prevention. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. <http://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth.htm>.
“The Holy Bible", King James Version. Cambridge Edition: 1769; King James Bible Online, 2014. http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/.
"Main reasons for opposing gay marriage, 2003." The American Family: Reflecting a Changing Nation. Ed. Cynthia S. Becker. 2005 ed. Detroit: Gale, 2005. Information Plus Reference Series. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
Pappas, Stephanie. "Same-Sex Parenting Is Beneficial." Parenting. Ed. Roman Espejo. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Why Gay Parents May Be the Best Parents." LiveScience.com. 2012. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.