An Act of Compassion for a Lesbian Couple in Indiana or something else?
An act of compassion was granted to a lesbian couple in Evansville, Indiana by federal judge, Richard Young when he ordered that their Massachusetts marriage be recognized. Although the case resembles a positive movement in the same-sex marriage fight, it is a sad one. The case concerns the relationship of Amy Sandler and Niki Quasney who argued for immediate recognition of their Massachusetts marriage via a temporary restraining order. Feelings of sadness stain the triumph in this case due to the fact that the main push and support for the movement is that Quasney has ovarian cancer and is terminally ill.
The couple and their lawyer prepared the defense to show that the emergency request for recognition is about recognizing a family. Sandler and Quasney claimed that they needed this approval to access federal and state safety nets for their spouses and children. Paul Castillo, a lawyer from Lambda Legal said, “This is, indeed, a case where a woman is dying and needs immediate relief for her family. We are here today so that a woman can die in dignity.” Judge Young believes that the couple meets the specific criteria for the act of immediate approval, thus the likelihood is high that they will win the case.
Prior to this mixed feeling triumph, Sandler and Quasney had been active in the fight to legalize same-sex marriage in Indiana. In specific, they had joined a federal lawsuit filed last month that argued Indiana’s ban on same-sex marriage and the state’s refusal to recognize same-sex union performed legally in other states. So far five legal challenges of this nature including the one stated above have been filed within the month towards Indiana’s ban. According to U.S.A. Today, more than 60 legal challenges have been filed nationwide after a U.S. Supreme Court decision granted full federal recognition to legally married gay couples.
So what do you think this recognition given by Judge Richard Young really means? Is it a true act of compassion? A feeling of pity? Or is he just trying to avoid bad press? Furthermore, now that one same-sex marriage has been granted on account of terminal illness, what does this mean for the future of same-sex marriage? I myself am puzzled, thus I will leave those answers up to you.
Positive Movement within the State of Ohio
About a decade ago, the state of Ohio passed a ban on the performance of same-sex marriage. In February of 2004, the current president George W. Bush proclaimed his support for a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Added to this, the following election in November showed that voters in Ohio and ten other states passed constitutional amendments defining “marriage as being between a man and a woman only” (Mears).
However, as of April 4, 2014 the tables have begun to turn on the legal status of same-sex marriage in the state of Ohio. A federal judge by the name of Judge Timothy Black motioned that he would declare Ohio’s current ban to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages unconstitutional. The defense that was used by lawyers to sway Judge Black was to dismiss the ban on the grounds of equal protection due to the fact that these marriages were obtained legally by the book. CNN sources tell us that the judge intends to publish his decision in writing by April 14 of this year.
As a strong advocate for the legalization of same-sex and Ohio resident, I was filled with feelings of excitement and hope after reading this article. The feeling of excitement filled my emotions as homosexual couples are gaining more civil rights. Along with this the feeling of hope overcame me as a conservative, decade-old ban has finally been put to bed. I look to the future believing that the state of Ohio will in fact legalize same-sex marriage soon.
5 Steps to keep the Fire Alive
Every wonder how to keep the fire in your relationship? Sometimes the passion in a relationship can begin to diminish once you are past the “honeymoon period.” Yes you and your partner have probably fallen into a comfortable life style and that is great! However, sometimes things like this can take a turn for the worst in the blink of an eye. For example, a couple can experience boredom, lack of self-worth, and a decline in passion for one another. In hopes of fighting this plague, Dr. Brian Rzepczynski has created his own list of five steps that will help to ensure that the fire is not put out in a relationship. Dr. Rzepczynski is a psychotherapist, author of “The Gay Love Coach,” and has had eighteen years of experience working with LGBT. Therefore, his professional qualifications make him an expert in this category.
“5 Simple Things to Make All the Difference”
- Greet Him or Her with a Hollywood-Style Kiss
- Date Him or Her All Over Again
- Unleash Your Inner Studs
- Keep Him or Her on His Toes & Begging For More
- Keep the Dream Alive (Rzepzynski)
To sum all of these points up, Dr. Rzepczynski believes that the best way to keep the fire in a relationship alive is to never take anything for granted. In other words, make every kiss count as if it is the last one that you two will ever share. Go on each date as if it were the very first. Make sure that the lines of communication are always open and clear in terms of sexual intimacy. Never lose your childhood innocence. Lastly, remember to dream big because anything is possible.
Two-Part List to Success
Ever find it difficult to express how you are really feeling to your partner? Do you want to have a stronger relationship? Psychotherapist, Adam D. Blum specializes in relationship and self-esteem issues for homosexual men and women. He has published two major aspects that he believes will ensure a healthy, strong relationship between two partners. Adam’s profession not only makes him an expert in this field, but he also has his own personal relationship with the same partner of 24 years.
To start a conversation off right when you are having mixed feelings, Adam believes that you should begin by talking about yourself. Do not bring up your significant other. For example you say, “I am feeling distant from you lately.” Do not say, “You are being distant with me lately.” There are many reasons why this approach is more effective. The main point of this is to maintain the focus on you. You would be defeating the entire purpose of trying to express your feelings by placing the significant other as the main subject. Added to this, you are the expert on yourself. No one else can tell with absolute certainty exactly what you are feeling at every given moment of the day. Thus, this upfront approach avoids unnecessary arguments. Another reason why this is a better alternative is your partner will not feel as if he or she is being attacked. This will prevent them from getting defensive and from leading to an argument. A third reason is that when you commit to focusing on you it is easier to keep the feeling of blame from your tone.
The second aspect from Adam’s list is that as a couple, you will need structure. By this he means, you need to take equal turns speaking your piece when conversing. This exercise helps you and your partner to really listen to each other, and to have time to reflect on what the other has said. In Adam’s professional opinion, he thinks that this aspect is the most important. “What we really want most from our partners is to be heard. If we feel deeply heard- if we truly believe our partner really gets what we are experiencing- we can forgive most kinds of actions” (Blum).
To be in a relationship can be extremely difficult. With all of the controversy and tension directed towards same-sex relationships, the difficulty level exceeds normal standards. If you are struggling in a same-sex relationship, I hope that this two-part list from Psychotherapist Adam D. Blum helps you to obtain a healthy, strong relationship with your partner.
A Simple Solution to the Mess. Valid or not valid?
For today’s post I would like to present you with a simple solution to the legalization of same-sex marriage controversy that was proposed by a professor of law, Mae Kuykendall. The post will be pretty much short and to the point. This is due to a couple of reasons. One of which being that I would like to draw attention to how simple this solution truly does seem. Along with this, I would like you as a reader, to sort through your personal thoughts and decide whether you think this solution is valid or not.
Mae Kuykendall is a professor of law at Michigan State University. When she is not defending a client in the courtroom, she enjoys studying the relationship between the legal definitions of marriage and the evolving usage of the word in society. Shortly after President Barack Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage to the public in his inaugural speech, Mae Kuykendall took it upon herself to voice her pro stance beliefs in an article titled “A Way Out of the Same-Sex Marriage Mess.” Her work was welcomed with open arms as it was quickly picked up and published in the notable, Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper, The New York Times. Here in this article is where she offers her simple solution. She claims that the act of same-sex marriage should be considered a fundamental right under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
After reading “A Way out of the Same-Sex Marriage Mess” I was baffled. I could not fathom the idea that there is an amendment defending the right of same-sex marriage already set in ink. So has the answer to this controversy been hiding in the U.S. Constitution all along? Can it really be that simple? As my readers, I leave that freedom of thought up to you.
Support from our Nation’s Leader: President Barack Obama
Today I decided to start a new category for my blog. The new category will revolve around the prominent, influential figures in our lives that support same-sex marriage. I decided to do this because I think it is crucial for us to be aware of the beliefs of these people. So I thought to myself, what better way to start this category then with the case of President Barack Obama.
On January 21, 2013 President Barack Obama gave his inaugural address. There was a monumental moment in his address when he declared his support for same-sex marriage. Prior to this, President Obama had thought that civil unions were sufficient on account of the word marriage being tied to classical traditions and religion. However, after talking with his wife and children, he decided to change his position on the matter. His pro same-sex marriage belief is now based on the common saying we all have been told at some part in our lives, “Treat others the way you would want to be treated.” He questions how he can expect his children to abide by this lesson when he does not.
President Obama has successfully made some changes in society. The Defense of Marriage Act that was signed by former president Bill Clinton is no longer enforced. This ruling used to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Added to this, he repealed the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law that did not allow homosexual men and women to serve in the military. Even though he has only made a couple of changes, that does not tarnish the fact that his support for same-sex marriage is crucial.
In his inaugural address President Barak Obama said, “Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law.” I believe that President Obama can and will continue to help in our fight to legalize same-sex marriage. The road to legalization is not easy, I know. However, with the support of our nation’s leader I truly believe that we can do it. These people (homosexuals) are in no way different from us, therefore they should not be denied the right to take part in marriage with their significant other. It is simply a matter of equality.
Current Breakdown
For today’s post I chose to shift from the opinion section and provide my readers with a current, concrete breakdown of which states and/or countries have legalized the act of same-sex marriage, and those that have deemed it illegal. Added to this, I was hoping to name those that are currently taking steps in their court systems towards legalizing the act.
According to an article in CNN News that was published this afternoon, there are currently seventeen states in the U.S. and the District of Columbia that have legalized same-sex marriage. These states include: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Now moving on to countries that have legalized same-sex marriage. Worldwide, there are sixteen countries that have laws permitting it. These countries include: Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal Iceland, Argentina, Denmark, France, Brazil, Uruguay, New Zealand, and Britain. It is important to note though, that legislation has been passed in Britain allowing same-sex couples to marry, however the ruling will not go into effect until March 29, 2014.
This list is definitely an improvement compared to previous polls. However, there is still a significant number of areas that prohibit the act of same-sex marriage. In fact, the U.S has thirty-one states that have banned same-sex marriage by constitutional amendment or state law. These states include: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. Even though Colorado has prohibited same-sex marriage, it does permit couples to obtain a civil union. A civil union grants a couple most of the rights of state civil marriages. However, it does not provide any of the federal benefits that usually come with marriage. The rights that are given through a civil union include: spousal support, medical decision-making privileges, access to a partner’s insurance, and hospital visitation rights.
I found this choice by the state of Colorado to be quite interesting. Why would a state allow same-sex couples the right to a civil union but not the right to a legal marriage? I simply do not understand that reasoning.
There is an interesting case going on in Mexico. In this area, same-sex marriage is legal only in some jurisdictions. As of now, the only parts of Mexico that permit the act are Mexico City and the southern Mexican state of Quintana Roo.
Lastly, there are three countries that are taking steps towards marriage. These countries include: Australia, Colombia, and Scotland. Overall, these countries have the support for the legalization of same-sex marriage. It is just a matter of paving the way through their justice systems.
The Use of Nature backfires for the Supreme Court
“To claim that the only natural forms of sex and pair bonding occur between unambiguous males and females is to ignore the facts of human biology” (Haskell par. 11). This is the argument that Biology professor, David George Haskell has formed to highlight the major error in our Supreme Court’s reasoning on same-sex marriage. For a little background knowledge, our nation’s Supreme Court system currently believes that one of the major reasons same-sex marriage should be banned is because of procreation. They see procreation as one of the most important aspects in the definition of marriage and as an exclusively heterosexual process only found in nature. The belief has been coined as the “objective biological fact.” Defenders of Proposition 8 relied on this fact when determining their status on legalizing same-sex marriage.
Oxford Biology professor, Mr. Haskell sees a great deal of error in the belief. If we are to follow the idea of determining the legal status of same-sex marriage solely based on nature, than it should be legal. David uses specific examples of organisms procreating in nature that are in fact hermaphroditic. He uses common garden snails as his first example. Whether male or female, a typical garden snail produces both egg and sperm. The process of sexual intercourse between these snails is random, and at times can be homosexual. Another example he gives is the Japanese cherry tree. Biological research has proven that these flowers are bisexual, thus the reproduction process is homosexual. Here is where David bases his argument and diminishes the idea that homosexuality is not unnatural, it is actually genetic.
As you follow my blog, you will see that I like to post about new outlooks about same-sex marriage and the legalization of it. Sometimes we as human beings tend to get caught up in our personal world and ignore everything that is going on around us. I know I do. This is why I have chosen to create a specific category in my blog for new outlooks. So now you have seen Professor David George Haskell’s biological take on the matter, does it not make sense? I will leave that decision up to you.
A different Voice in the Fight for Same-Sex Marriage
“Marriage is just a word, you bring it definition.” These wise words of my rebellious grandmother are why I have chosen this topic for today’s post. When debating over the topic of legalizing same-sex marriage, proponents tend to rely on the legalistic view rather than the social view as their strongest argument. In other words, they illustrate how as citizens of the United States, homosexuals are being denied their rights due to that fact that they are not allowed to legally marry their significant other. In case you are unfamiliar, these rights include such liberties as hospital visitation rights and immigration rights. The act of a U.S. citizen being denied these rights solely because of sexuality choice would seem to be the strongest take on an argument don’t you think? At first I would have agreed with you. However, my opinion has swayed after reading Ralph Wedgwood’s article, “The Meaning of Same-Sex Marriage.”
In the article Wedgwood describes his idea of the true “social meaning” of marriage, and how it holds more power in an argumentative debate. Mr. Ralph Wedgwood is a well-respected professor at The University of South Carolina where he teaches Philosophy and Epistemology. These two studies of knowledge provide him with expertise on the human mind and how it functions. Professor Wedgwood concluded, “Marriage involves sexual intimacy; it involves the couple’s cooperation in dealing with the domestic and economic necessities of life; and it is entered into with a mutual long-term commitment to sustaining the relationship” (par. 7). Wedgwood uses this definition of marriage to explain his reasoning that same-sex marriage should be socially accepted in society. Added to this, he believes that a homosexual couple and a heterosexual couple generally share the same characteristics and expectations, therefore no reason should stand in the way of same-sex marriage becoming recognized and legal (par.7).
I found this professor’s outlook to be extremely refreshing. As a member of the younger generation, I tend to find myself as a strong advocate for equality in all aspects of life. I really enjoyed how Wedgwood was able to completely ignore the aspect of gender combination, and create a logical reasoning of what marriage truly should be coined as. In turn, his definition pulls on the emotional strings of readers that these relationships between human beings really are in no way different from the typical norm.
We all know that society is constantly evolving. Even though some conservatives desperately try to hang on to the old ways, the change is inevitable. Never let someone constrain your way of thinking. Especially when it comes to a topic such as the legalizing of same-sex marriage. Remember, “Marriage is just a word, you bring it definition.”
P.S. If you are interested in reading Ralph Wedgwood’s article in its entirety, here’s the link! http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/marriage-meaning-and-equality/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
The Fight for Same-Sex Marriage 