Argueing for the Legalization of same-sex marriages in Illinois Essay

Argueing for the Legalization of same-sex marriages in Illinois - Essay Exampleto make decisions for their teammate who is being hospitalized, have the right to sue on their partners behalf and cannot be forced to testify against them in court. Married couples also pay slight in taxes and receive many other social and financial benefits. But because queer couples are legally prevented from marrying, they are excluded from receiving the same considerations that married heterosexual couples have a go at it (Eagle, 2006). This paper will more closely examine the benefits denied lively couples as well as the political and legal implications involved with the issue. It will conclude with a discussion involving one of the main non-religious based reasons that those who oppose gay marriage espouse, the affect of this type of living arrangement on the children of the relationship.The argument proposed by the opponents of gay marriage is that the U.S. Constitution guarantees a republican form of government in which elected officials are intended to set social policy for the nation. Legislators do this by representing their constituents moral views when drafting laws. Because the Constitution bars the intertwining of state and religion, the only method of ensuring that moral and ethical codes are enforced throughout companionship is through acts of legislation. In fact, lawmakers draft laws that address moral issues constantly and not just in high profile matters such as abortion, pornography and gay rights. When courts determine morality issues, they counteract legislation meant to protect the moral fabric of society and break down the constitutionally guaranteed separation of powers within the government. When judges grate the power of the peoples representatives to set societys moral compass, they likewise undercut the authority of parents, schools, and other community groups to set the standards they would like to jut out their children and fellow citizens li ve by. Indeed, it is a frontal assault on community values writ large (Raul,