Draft

The issue of homosexuals not being allowed to legally marry in the eyes of the government, or in the eyes of the church has been a pending problem since the 90’s. The lawful beginning of gay marriage started when the “Defense Against Marriage ACT” was passed to protect marriage. This prohibit3e any marriage or civil union of same sex couples to be recognized by the Federal Government, but luckily was revoked in 1996. These kind of acts in our modern government are upsetting. The First Amendment is supposed to protect our rights as citizens of the United States of America.. As stated, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”, main concern is “no law respecting an establishment of religion” [**THIS SENTENCE ISN'T WORKING. REPHRASE.]**. This would hopefully be enough to protect civil rights as a whole for all people to be allowed to practice any religion, and be recognized by the government in all aspects of life. There is a problem when homosexuals are not given the same rights as any other person. These people are basic citizens, they pay taxes, and abide the same laws as we do. Just a small group of states recognize the civil union or homosexuals, when all homosexuals are abiding citizens in all states. The church has play the major role in where gays stand in communities being able to deny then access to their church services when, anyone in the united states should be allowed to practice their religions freely [**THEY CAN. AT HOME. SHOULDN'T A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME LIMITS? THERE ARE CHURCHES THAT ARE OPEN, SO WHY NOT GO THERE INSTEAD OF TRYING TO JOIN A GROUP THAT DOESN'T WANT YOU?]**. Where does the judgment of civil rights for this ever growing social group begin? Is it the federal government, the state governments, and churches that have all the power to control how these people can worship, and love?

The Defense of Marriage Act was a bill that was pushed through congress in 1996 to protect marriage in the united states [**MISSING SOME CAPITALIZATION...]**. “DOMA relieves states and other jurisdictions of the obligation to recognize same-sex marriages and marriage-like relationships authorized by other jurisdictions.” This meant that the federal government, state governments, and churches of any congregations can deny the rights to gays and lesbians to obtain marriage license, or be recognized as a civil union. The government had put rights on marriage. Many would argue this violates the pursuit of happiness promised in the constitution, and law respecting establishments of religions. (//Loving v. Virginia// [1967]). The government dipping their fingers into the way people live is nothing we have not witnessed before. The first amendment clearly states that the DOMA was a major violation, and the supreme court condemn it as unconstitutional and the act was no longer effect. If something as bold as this was pushed through congress at one time it is hard to believe that something else would not sooner or later. Politicians use the gay marriage aspect to fuel their political agenda to play on the emotions of the more religious communities in America. Constitutionally there should be no talk about the marriage rights of citizens because there is no correct standard of marriage, unless you do practice a religion where this is looked down upon. The United States Supreme Court has said that marriage is "fundamental to our very existence and survival". A recent example would the Bush Administration claiming America needs new moral structure, and standards. Most of the time while Bush was in office proclaimed that the constitution was founded by Christians, and that gay marriage would be violating marriage its self. The ceremony is the only religious aspect of marriage. Churches denying services to gays in understandable [**DIDN'T YOU SAY DIFFERENTLY EARLIER, OR DID I MISREAD? MAKE SURE YOU ARE CLEAR.]** but the outreach to the state governments denying marriage licenses is not the same. The problem talking about gay marriage is religion is brought up some time along the line. Even though people know that there is supposed to be a separation of church and state, and anyone can practice any religion freely as they please. Churches frequently deny gays and lesbians access to practice their love of god in churches all over America. There are civil rights protecting gays from hate crimes, but the churches denying average people the right to practice their beliefs is not lawful and unjust. A lot of churches use scripture on their defense about why gays and lesbians should not be allowed in their churches. Many of the scriptures used are ambiguous in meaning, and can multiple interpretations attached to them. **THIS IS A START. OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE MORE TO DO, SO I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'LL TACKLE PRACTICAL REASONS TO PERMIT THESE UNIONS. I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'D WIN THE MORAL/RELIGIOUS ARGUMENT. WHAT ARE POSSIBLE BENEFITS/DANGERS GIVEN OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC SITUATION? WHAT MIGHT WE GAIN? SO FAR, YOU'VE MANAGED TO KEEP AN EVEN TONE DESPITE IT BEING A HEATED SUBJECT.**