advantages of same sex marriage essay

Evidence is clear on the benefits of legalising same-sex  marriage

PhD Candidate, School of Arts and Social Sciences, James Cook University

Disclosure statement

Ryan Anderson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

James Cook University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

Emotive arguments and questionable rhetoric often characterise debates over same-sex marriage. But few attempts have been made to dispassionately dissect the issue from an academic, science-based perspective.

Regardless of which side of the fence you fall on, the more robust, rigorous and reliable information that is publicly available, the better.

There are considerable mental health and wellbeing benefits conferred on those in the fortunate position of being able to marry legally. And there are associated deleterious impacts of being denied this opportunity.

Although it would be irresponsible to suggest the research is unanimous, the majority is either noncommittal (unclear conclusions) or demonstrates the benefits of same-sex marriage.

Further reading: Conservatives prevail to hold back the tide on same-sex marriage

What does the research say?

Widescale research suggests that members of the LGBTQ community generally experience worse mental health outcomes than their heterosexual counterparts. This is possibly due to the stigmatisation they receive.

The mental health benefits of marriage generally are well-documented . In 2009, the American Medical Association officially recognised that excluding sexual minorities from marriage was significantly contributing to the overall poor health among same-sex households compared to heterosexual households.

Converging lines of evidence also suggest that sexual orientation stigma and discrimination are at least associated with increased psychological distress and a generally decreased quality of life among lesbians and gay men.

A US study that surveyed more than 36,000 people aged 18-70 found lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals were far less psychologically distressed if they were in a legally recognised same-sex marriage than if they were not. Married heterosexuals were less distressed than either of these groups.

So, it would seem that being in a legally recognised same-sex marriage can at least partly overcome the substantial health disparity between heterosexual and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons.

The authors concluded by urging other researchers to consider same-sex marriage as a public health issue.

A review of the research examining the impact of marriage denial on the health and wellbeing of gay men and lesbians conceded that marriage equality is a profoundly complex and nuanced issue. But, it argued that depriving lesbians and gay men the tangible (and intangible) benefits of marriage is not only an act of discrimination – it also:

disadvantages them by restricting their citizenship;

hinders their mental health, wellbeing, and social mobility; and

generally disenfranchises them from various cultural, legal, economic and political aspects of their lives.

Of further concern is research finding that in comparison to lesbian, gay and bisexual respondents living in areas where gay marriage was allowed, living in areas where it was banned was associated with significantly higher rates of:

mood disorders (36% higher);

psychiatric comorbidity – that is, multiple mental health conditions (36% higher); and

anxiety disorders (248% higher).

But what about the kids?

Opponents of same-sex marriage often argue that children raised in same-sex households perform worse on a variety of life outcome measures when compared to those raised in a heterosexual household. There is some merit to this argument.

In terms of education and general measures of success, the literature isn’t entirely unanimous. However, most studies have found that on these metrics there is no difference between children raised by same-sex or opposite-sex parents.

In 2005, the American Psychological Association released a brief reviewing research on same-sex parenting. It unambiguously summed up its stance on the issue of whether or not same-sex parenting negatively impacts children:

Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.

Further reading: Same-sex couples and their children: what does the evidence tell us?

Drawing conclusions

Same-sex marriage has already been legalised in 23 countries around the world , inhabited by more than 760 million people.

Despite the above studies positively linking marriage with wellbeing, it may be premature to definitively assert causality .

But overall, the evidence is fairly clear. Same-sex marriage leads to a host of social and even public health benefits, including a range of advantages for mental health and wellbeing. The benefits accrue to society as a whole, whether you are in a same-sex relationship or not.

As the body of research in support of same-sex marriage continues to grow, the case in favour of it becomes stronger.

• Human rights
• Same-sex marriage
• Same-sex marriage plebiscite

Research Fellow

Senior Research Fellow - Women's Health Services

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Why Same-Sex Marriage is Important for Good Health

• Children & Families
• Gender & Sexuality
• Health Care

Connect with the author

The debate over same-sex marriage – or “gay marriage” – has been contentious in national and state politics for nearly twenty years. After voters in many states rushed to ban same-sex unions, the tide turned. In recent years, sixteen states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage and another three states have approved civil unions or domestic partnerships that include full spousal rights for lesbian, gay and bisexual couples. Despite this progress, as of the end of 2013, only 37% of Americans live in a state with marriage equality; and many lesbian, gay, and bisexual people still do not enjoy the full rights and benefits associated with marriage. This is unfortunate for moral and economic reasons. Equally important, a growing body of public health research documents the many health benefits associated with legal same-sex marriage. Harm from Discrimination and Marriage Bans Numerous health studies conducted during the past decade have documented how discrimination causes harm and leads to significant health disparities. Discriminatory environments and public policies create public stigma and can provoke feelings of rejection, shame and low self-esteem. Limiting marriage to heterosexual couples denies lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults access to an important social institution and in an important sense turns them into second-class citizens. Denying legal recognition to gay partnerships also reduces access to affordable health insurance. Most Americans, some 55%, are covered through their own or a family member’s employer-sponsored health insurance plan. But many employers do not extend coverage to same-sex partners or children of same-sex partners. Even among large companies with more than 500 employees, only half offer health benefits to same-sex partners. When states adopt legal same-sex marriage or legalize civil unions, many workplaces offering health insurance are required to treat married same-sex couples like married heterosexual couples. But most states still discriminate, and several research studies have reported related disparities in health and access to care for lesbians, gays, and bisexual people living in states that ban same-sex marriage through constitutional amendments.

• Lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults living in such states are more likely than their counterparts in states with same-sex marriage to report symptoms of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use disorder.  
• Same-sex couples across the country are less likely to have health insurance and are more likely to delay or forgo medical care.

Same-Sex Marriage Improves Health and Access to Health Care Research on marriage and health reports a consistent and well-established theme: married people live happier, healthier and longer lives. Consequently, expanding and supporting marriage for same-sex couples should enable lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults to live happier, healthier and longer lives. In fact, studies conducted in states that have adopted same-sex marriage have already established significant improvements in health and access to care:

• A study in Massachusetts followed a group of gay and bisexual men before and after the legalization of same-sex marriage and discovered that these men became less likely to need mental health or medical care visits.  
• Two studies found that lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults who married following the California Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage reported less psychological distress and were more likely to gain health insurance coverage.

The health benefits from legal same-sex marriage extend beyond the adults themselves – particularly to the 220,000 children in the United States being raised by same-sex parents. Employers who offer health insurance to dependent children often require minors to be related to the employee by birth, legal marriage or legal adoption. Thus, children are left with diminished protections in states that do not allow legal marriages or adoptions for lesbian and gay couples. A study recently reported in Pediatrics found that children with same-sex parents were less likely to have private health insurance than children with heterosexual parents. The study also found that disparities in private insurance coverage diminished for children of same-sex parents living in states with marriage equality or laws supporting gay and lesbian adoptions. How All States Can Improve Family Protections Given political gridlock in Congress, states are more likely than the federal government to advance protections for members of gay, lesbian, and bisexual families. Public opinion is shifting rapidly in support of same-sex marriage, so more states will take this step. But not all states will legalize same-sex marriage in the immediate future, and in many of these lagging states, steps forward will take the form of measures that garner stronger public support than legal marriage. Such steps beneficial to the lesbian, gay, and bisexual population include anti-discrimination laws in housing and employment; rights of legal adoption by gay and lesbian couples; anti-bullying laws to better protect gay youth from harassment; and inclusion of crimes against gays, lesbians, and bisexual people in anti-crime legislation. Each of these steps can reduce discrimination and lead to improvements in mental and physical health. The path towards same-sex marriage may follow two steps in more conservative states or states controlled by Republican lawmakers and administrations. Initially, states may adopt civil unions or comprehensive domestic partnerships that include full spousal rights and protections for members of gay and lesbian partnerships – to be followed later by full marriage equality by legislation or court rulings. This staged approach has happened in several states, most recently in New Jersey and Colorado. Regardless of which path states follow toward equality, the health benefits associated with same-sex marriage cannot be overlooked. These benefits should always be highlighted as debates continue in legislative chambers, election contests, and federal and state courtrooms.

Read more in Gilbert Gonzales and Lynn Blewett, “ Disparities in Health Insurance among Children with Same-Sex Parents .” Pediatrics 132, no. 4 (2012): 703-711.

Related Content

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Same Sex Marriage Essay for Students

Introduction

The same-sex marriage has sparked both emotional and political clashes between supporters and opponents for years. Although it has been regulated through law and religion in many countries around the world, legal and social responses often range from celebration to criminalisation of the pair.

Essay No - 1

Marriage equality – importance of same sex union.

Back in 2018, the Supreme Court of India passed a watershed judgement that was ordained to go down the archives of the country’s history. In spite of the majoritarian prejudices prevalent in India directed towards the LGBT community, the apex court revoked the draconian and out-dated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. 

This Section, in typically vague and diplomatic terms, belittled homosexuality and criminalised intercourse that goes against the “laws of nature”. It was incorporated into the Indian Penal Code under the British Raj in 1861, and it took the Indian judiciary system 70 years since independence, to abrogate the law and decriminalise homosexuality. 

Nonetheless, the landmark decision was met with euphoria from its proponents, especially the activists who fought for the cause for more than a decade, wrangling with society and courts to attain equality in the eyes of the law. Even though a marriage equality essay is far from sight in a time when it is legal to marry the person one loves irrespective of their gender identity or sex, the decision by Supreme Court portends its occurrence. 

Equality in Marriage

Equality in marriage is an idea, which propagates that all marriages notwithstanding whether it is a Sapphic marriage or gay marriage or heterogeneous matrimony are equal and should enjoy similar rights and status in society.

Unfortunately, our society’s construct is such that we grow up with the idea that only a man and woman can be bound in matrimony. And while doing so, we overlook the multitudes of individuals that associate with different sexual preferences and gender identities. 

While the western world marches toward inclusive societies, where individuals are treated as equals irrespective of their sexuality or gender, we still are in the embryonic stages towards such acceptance. 

If one searches for same-sex marriage essay or statistics, one will find that support for marriage equality in countries like the USA hovers above 60%, a data presented by Pew Research Center. And if one were to rummage through the same statistics for India, it is a dismal 18%, according to a poll by Mood of the Nation (MOTN) in 2019.

Importance of Same-Sex Marriage

Because no change is appreciated until it contributes to the betterment of society in one way or another, proponents of an inclusive society have long contested its importance in same-gender marriage essays and discourses.

We are an overpopulated country and encouragement of marriage equality and an increase in same-sex matrimonies would lead to lower population growth. At the same time, it might witness a growth in adoptions of orphans, which is a significant move towards a holistic society. 

And last but not the least it would be an encouraging shift towards adherence to the laws of human rights, which dictates that no human should live under discrimination, fear, or oppression. 

The seeds of prejudice prevalent in our society, however, will not change overnight. Our traditions and social construct are vastly different from those of western societies. A change in mindset is a process that might take decades and even centuries. 

Nonetheless, the change should begin somewhere. And awareness that every human is equal and their preferences and choices about who they love and marry should not be a ground for discrimination is quintessential to that change. 

Essay No - 2

Same-gender marriage: a threat or blessing for the reunion of two people.

Marriage or wedlock is the cultural union of two people for a lifetime. Considered an integral part of one’s life, it involves both legal and social formalities performed by the two families in concern. Besides, it also comprises regulations and obligations to be followed by the spouses and their children as well as their immediate family members.

However, there have been instances where marriage equality essays have been spoken of by many. These are instances where marriage between couples of the same gender is considered inappropriate. Nevertheless, the global society is evolving and people are coming out of the closet more often than ever before.

How Does the World Perceive?

Most communities are becoming liberal in terms of being more accepting in nature. People by and large are taking a stand to abide by their sexuality. It is no more a matter of shame that has to be kept hidden or shut behind the doors.

Multiple same sex marriage essay has come up sighting the incidents where the couple were accepted by their respective families. In addition, the act of legalization of same-sex marriage has been going on since the past two decades with great vigour.

Countries like the Netherlands, Spain, and Belgium had legalised it in the wake of the 2000s, while other countries such as Canada, South Africa, and Norway followed suit in the upcoming years.

The marriage equality essay has been in the limelight because more people are opening up about the benefits and importance of such marriages in today’s world. The reasons that have fuelled such a dramatic change can be listed below as -

People can be themselves and do not have to try hard to get accepted for who they are.

They are proud of both their individuality as well as sexuality and do not have to wear a mask.

They can plan for the future instead of having to succumb to societal pressure.

Same-sex couples now have the opportunity to live with their loved ones happily, without having to take cover. 

The spread of the same gender marriage essay has been a saviour for many who were not aware of the changes that are taking place all around the world. It has not only made the LGBTQ community aware but also encouraged them to evaluate themselves and take the plunge to raise their voices too. They can now take a stand for themselves and feel relieved that they are not discriminated against anymore.

What is the Scope in the Future?

Although a significant part of the world including countries like Taiwan, Germany, USA, etc. have been able to match the steps with the advancing surrounding; there is still a section who has not. Even now, marriage equality essays and other online content create backlash.

Therefore, it is essential that more people come forward and join hands to the cause of being united in terms of accepting the bond between people. 

Essay No – 3

Same-sex marriage - the changing attitude of modern society.

Most religions and cultures accept that marriage is not a trivial matter but is a key to the pursuit of happiness. However, they still openly criticise the practice of same-sex weddings. Fortunately, the stigma related to homophobia and LGBTQ community is slowly but surely lessening. Better education, introduction to different cultures, and an open mindset played a critical role in this development. 

Let’s discuss the changing attitude of today’s society and the benefits a culture might enjoy in this same-sex marriage essay.

The History of Same-Sex Marriage

During the mid-20 th century, historian Johann Jakob Bachofen and Lewis Henry Morgan made systematic analyses of the marriage and kinship habits in different cultures. They noted that most cultures expressed support towards a heteronormative form of marriage that revolves around union between opposite-sex partners. However, all these cultures practised some form of flexibility while following these ideals. 

Scholars like historian John Boswell often declared that same-sex unions were recognised in medieval Europe, but the most notable changes were introduced during the late 20 th century. 

An Accepting Society

A more stable society was created over the years, with a better understanding of each other and acceptance for the different. As the culture opened its arms to learn about others, it also learned about minority groups such as the LGBT community. Similar to racial equality, or the equality movement for women, growing acceptance of that community ultimately made the commune much more stable. 

Many consider that same-sex unity will only benefit the homosexual community. However, it leaves a much more profound impact on the overall society. To begin with, it will reduce homophobia by a significant margin. Acknowledging a homosexual relationship will also reduce hate crimes in countries like India. There are many research papers and marriage equality essays available that show how communities that allow an individual to choose their partner to enjoy a significantly less rate of crime. 

The Economic Boost

An unlikely benefit of same-sex marriage and a compassionate society towards homosexuals is the economic boost. For one, the wedding and marriage industry is the biggest beneficiary of same-sex marriage, as it increases their customer base by a significant margin. It also allows several business providers to service them, and helps the travel and tourism industry by boosting the number of honeymoon goers.

For example, businesses in New York enjoyed almost 260 million dollars boost within a year when same-sex marriage was legalised. Similar effects were also found in other countries.

Even though India still hasn’t shaken the stigma attached to a same-sex relationship, somewhat modern society is slowly learning to accept the diversity of human nature. With the help of the government, activists, and hundreds of individuals creating and posting blogs, same-gender marriage essays on the internet, society is gradually becoming an understanding and nurturing entity for everyone.

FAQs on Same Sex Marriage Essay for Students

1. Which countries have legalized same-sex marriage and when?

With the advancement in the thought process of people, many countries have passed laws in favor of same-sex marriage, thereby legalizing it in their countries. The first countries to legalize same-sex marriage before 2010 were the Netherlands who legalized it in 2001, Belgium legalized it in 2003, Canada and Spain legalized it in 2005, South Africa in 2006, Sweden and Norway in 2009 and Iceland, Argentina, and Portugal legalized same-sex marriage in 2010. Later on, Denmark legalised it in 2012, and countries like Uruguay, New Zealand, France, and Brazil in 2013, Ireland, Luxembourg, and the United States in 2015, Colombia in 2016,  Malta, Germany, and Finland in 2017, Australia in 2018 and Ecuador and Austria in 2019. The recent country to legalize same-sex marriage is the United Kingdom. Thus, now people have started accepting the idea of same-sex marriages across the world.

2. What is the importance of same-sex marriage and why should it be legalized?

As the world is progressing we all must understand that each one of us is a human being and before labelling us with our caste and love preference, we must learn to respect each other. In this progressing era as more people with same-sex preference are coming up it has become more important to accept and legalize same-sex marriage because of the following reasons:

It will give people a chance to be themselves and enjoy their own individuality.

It will make people understand that loving a person of the same sex is not wrong or abnormal.

It will teach people that it is better for people to spend their lives with someone they love and not with the person whom they don’t even like.

This will make this place a much happier space to be in.

It gives people with homosexuality a hope of a happy life.

3. What is the status of same-sex marriage in India?

Same-sex marriage in India is still not encouraged. In India, neither the laws are lenient nor the people are broad-minded to accept it happening around them. The legal and community barriers never give these people a chance to prove themselves. Indian society is not very welcoming to changes that are different from the customs and culture they have practised till now. Thus, any change in these cultural laws gives rise to an outburst of anger in the country which makes legalising these issues even more sensitive and challenging for the law. India still needs time to get accustomed to the concept of same-sex marriage. However, not knowing about the concept is a different thing, and completely opposing it is different, therefore, awareness about such issues is very necessary for the developing countries so that people can first understand the pros and cons of it and then either accept it or reject it. Not only in India, but in other countries also, the idea of same-sex marriage is not accepted because they think it is against their religion. People opposing the LGBTQ community to get the right to marry their lovers take away the very basic human right of such people. There has been a long-lasting war for the members of the LGBTQ community for their rights. Although there have been some positive results in recent years, for example, the end of Section 377, which criminalizes homosexuality. However, India still has a long way to go in terms of the LGBTQ community and their rights.

4. What approaches can be used to legalize same-sex marriage?

Same-sex marriage is currently not taken in kind words by the people but slowly and steadily the things are changing and people are able to change their perspective with respect to the LGBT community. Legalizing same-sex marriage in a country like India where a number of religions and customs are practiced is really difficult. Therefore, few approach switch can help legalize same-sex marriage without hurting any religion are that the existing laws are interpreted in such a way that they legalize same-sex marriage, LGBT can be regarded as a different community which has customs of its own that permits same-sex marriage, making amendments in the Act itself or all the religions can individually interpret their marriage laws in such a way that same-sex marriage becomes in accordance with their religion.

5. Briefly discuss your view on same-sex marriages?

Same-sex marriage refers to the marriage of the same sex which is similar to heterosexual marriages in terms of rituals and proceedings. Same-sex marriages should not be ashamed of and are justified because after all love knows no boundaries. The community must be made aware of this concept so that they can appreciate and celebrate the union of two loving souls without considering their gender. The community as a whole must attempt to legalize and accept same-sex marriage with respect to the laws, religion, and customs of the country. In the coming years, there is a ray of hope that same-sex marriages will also be celebrated just like normal marriages in India.

One Benefit to Same-Sex Marriage that Nobody is Talking About

Extending marriage rights to same-sex couples will improve America’s health. As a researcher studying how same-sex married couples influence each other’s health, I find that same-sex spouses do many of the same things that heterosexual spouses do to influence each other’s long-term health.

Columns appearing on the service and this webpage represent the views of the authors, not of The University of Texas at Austin.

As the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether the Constitution requires recognition of same-sex marriage, many have speculated about the real-world consequences and benefits of marriage equality.

On at least one front the answer is clear: Extending marriage rights to same-sex couples will improve America’s health.

The empirical evidence is indisputable: Married Americans are healthier and live longer than the unmarried. They enjoy better overall health, have fewer chronic conditions, are less likely to have a heart attack and more likely to survive a heart attack if they have one, and they are less likely to be institutionalized in old age.

Marriage benefits health because spouses influence each other’s health habits, provide emotional and social support that promotes healthy immune and cardiovascular functioning, and facilitate the use of preventive and curative health care.

These well-documented findings make the denial of marriage to gay and lesbian Americans a hazard to public health.

Marriage may be even more important to the health of gay and lesbian people than to heterosexuals. Gays and lesbians face more stress throughout life — precisely because of their sexual minority status — and this stress takes a toll on their health.

A recent Institute of Medicine report shows that sexual minority populations are at greater risk for a wide range of health conditions including depression and anxiety, chronic health conditions, disability and overall poorer physical health.

The legalization of same-sex marriage in some states means that social scientists are now in a position to assess marriage and health dynamics of same-sex couples. As a researcher studying how same-sex married couples influence each other’s health, including how they take care of each other during illness, I find that same-sex spouses do many of the same things that heterosexual spouses do to influence each other’s long-term health.

For example, they help each other with important medical decisions and remind each other to take their medications, eat well and exercise. But my empirical findings show that when one spouse is seriously ill, gay and lesbian spouses tend to be even more supportive of each other than are heterosexual spouses.

Perhaps most striking, same-sex patients and their spouses are more likely to mutually support each other when one of them is seriously ill, and to have more confidence that the spouse will provide the support he or she needs if future health problems occur.

In contrast, heterosexual marriages are characterized by strong gender dynamics in which women provide more support to men than men provide to women. Heterosexual women provide more support to their spouses even when the woman is the patient.

Indeed, heterosexual women more often feel they cannot rely on their spouses to take care of them. And couples are more likely to divorce if a wife becomes seriously ill than if a husband becomes seriously ill.

Sometimes people talk as if marriage equality is all about giving gay and lesbian couples the same benefits as heterosexual couples. That is important, of course, but equally important are the benefits that heterosexual couples may derive as we learn more about how men and women in same-sex unions promote healthy behaviors and supportive relationships.

Securing marriage equality for gay and lesbian people can provide broader lessons about how to increase the health-building properties of marriage for all Americans.

Access to marriage will benefit the health of gay and lesbian populations and provide greater stability for their families. A healthier population promotes quality of life for individuals and, at the same time, serves to reduce health care costs for society as a whole.

We can debate whether embracing same-sex marriage is the right thing to do. We should all agree that it is the healthy thing to do.

Debra Umberson is the Christie and Stanley E. Adams Jr. Centennial Professor in Liberal Arts and a professor of sociology at The University of Texas at Austin.

A version of this op-ed appeared in the Huffington Post and the Austin American Statesman .

To view more op-eds from Texas Perspectives, click here .

Like us on Facebook .

New op-ed by @LiberalArtsUT prof: Health is a benefit to all marriages. http://t.co/RGjvnUHcgO — Texas Perspectives (@TexPerspectives) May 13, 2015

Explore Latest Articles

May 23, 2024

NSF Funded Expedition Project Uses AI to Rethink Computer Operating Systems

May 20, 2024

Conquering Breast Cancer Using Supercomputers, Data, And Mathematical Modeling

Otters, Especially Females, Use Tools To Survive a Changing World

Marriage Equality: Same-Sex Marriage Essay (Critical Writing)

Introduction, same sex unions, history of same sex unions, debate on gay marriage.

Marriage has been regarded as one of the most important social institutions in the society. This is because it forms the basis of organization in any given society. “Marriage refers to an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually intimate and sexual, are acknowledged in a variety of ways, depending on the culture or subculture in which it is found” (Dziengel, 2010).

Marriage is treated quite differently depending on the norms and values that exist in a given society. The current society is experiencing many social changes, which have influenced the nature of relationships among human beings. Marriage has also been affected by these social changes.

Marriage is today very dynamic and people treat it differently from what it used to be in the past. Same sex unions are becoming popular in many countries and they are quite prevalent in European countries as compared to other places. Same sex marriage is commonly known as gay marriage. “It refers to a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or social gender” (Goldberg, 2010).

“Various types of same sex marriages have existed, ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions” (Haider & Joslyn, 2008). The early practice of this type of marriage was witnessed when Emperor Nero married a man who was serving as a servant in his Roman Empire.

Apart from Rome, this practice occurred in China during the Ming Dynasty and also in Spain. This type of marriage had very bad reputation and it was strongly rejected by many individuals and countries. “This attitude has been changing in the past few decades” (Haider & Joslyn, 2008). The twenty first century has witnessed a drastic change in the way people perceive this type of relationship.

Netherlands in the year 2001 emerged to be the first country to allow gay relationships. In 2003 the government of Belgium accepted this type of union. In 2005 both Canada and Spain formally accepted gay marriages. In 2006 the people of South African were allowed to practice gay marriages.

Sweden allowed it in 2009. Last year, Argentina, Iceland and Portugal also accepted this kind of relationship. In Mexico it is legalized but with some restrictions in the sense that it can only be practiced within the city of Mexico. However, all Mexican states acknowledge it.

“Israel does not recognize same sex marriages performed on its territory, but recognizes same sex marriages performed in foreign jurisdiction” (Ronner, 2005). Apart form South Africa, other African countries still remain conservative and they are not willing to accept this relationship. “In the United States, although same sex marriages are not recognized federally, same sex couples can marry in five states and one district” (Smith, 2010).

Opposing Arguments

The subject of gay marriage has been seriously debated in many places. This issue has been discussed both in religious and political circles. The following arguments have been used to reject gay marriage.

The general question is that why should people practice this kind of relationship? This is what the majority of people opposed to it seem to be asking whenever this issue is raised in any discussion. This people contend that legal relationships are only those between men and women. Hence they do not see the sense of people engaging in any other type of intimate relationship (Ronner, 2005).

Marriage is often seen as a religious rite and in this case people look at it from the religious perspective. They therefore believe that if gay marriage is legitimized it would undermine the religious principles. This is because religion has always been used to sanctify marriages (Farrior, 2009).

The dignity of the church has been affected because of the different attitudes adopted by religious leaders on this matter. Some churches are likely to get split because they cannot come to an agreement on how to handle this issue. This has adversely affected their capacity to spread the gospel. Some members of the church have even lost their faith and trust in religion because they do not agree with the church leaders who support this kind of relationship.

For example, the Anglican Church members and their leaders have been arguing about gay marriages. Since some of them support it, they have now formed a separate church. The Catholic Church has also had the same problem. Some Catholic monks have also been accused of child molestation and this has really affected their reputation.

Marriage is naturally understood as an institution for raising children. Same sex marriages do not give children an opportunity to have a good development. “In this case some individuals strongly feel that same sex partners can not provide the moral and psychological support required for raising children” (Goldberg, 2010). This is because such children would find it quite unusual when they realize that their parents have the same sex. This can really affect them psychologically (Goldberg, 2010).

Gay marriages are understood as unnatural unions. “This premise influences other arguments and lies behind many negative opinions about homosexuality in general” (Acevado & Wada, 2011). Since gay relationships are not normal, they should be reduced to social unions instead of being authenticated by the national leaders in a given country. This is because if such abnormal behaviors are allowed, they are likely to become very prevalent in our society in the near future. This may cause very many social problems.

Marriage is also an important cultural symbol. “Apart from marriage being an institution, it is also a symbol representing our culture’s ideals about sex, sexuality, and human relationships” (Haider & Joslyn, 2008). Symbols are very important because it is through them that we develop a sense of belonging to a given society or race. “Thus when the traditional nature of marriage is challenged in any way, so are people’s basic identities” (Haider & Joslyn, 2008).

It would also be difficult and expensive to integrate this people into the society. This is because people have to be taught to accept them. “Teaching people to become tolerant to gay individuals would be expensive” (Smith, 2010).

Supporting Arguments

Even though gay marriage is not supported by some people, I disagree with them because of the following arguments.

Marriage enables people to have access to social and economic needs. “Studies repeatedly demonstrate that people who marry tend to be better off financially, emotionally, psychologically, and even medically” (Ronner, 2005). Therefore if gay couples are guaranteed the right to marry they will probably have the chance to benefit from being married. This will also be helpful to the gay communities at large. For example the gay couples would remain committed in helping each other because of the marriage vows.

It would also be wrong for gay relationships to be treated as civil unions. This is because if the gay individuals can get married, they stand a better chance of enjoying several opportunities. This can not be the case if they are in civil unions. “Equality before the law means that creating civil unions for gays will lead to civil unions for every one else and this type of marriage will be more of a threat than gay unions could possibly be” (Farrior, 2009).

The stability of our society can be enhanced if gay individuals can be given a chance to marry. Even the people who oppose this relationship believe that the family is the basis of our society. Therefore, if more families are formed through gay marriages, we can have a great society. The family also dictates the general trend in the society. Marriage would also facilitate the integration of gay people into their communities. Accepting gay relationships will therefore enhance the strength of our communities.

Many children are leading poor lifestyles and they cannot even access the common basic needs. Destitute children can have a chance to lead a good life if they can be adopted by married gay individuals. This is because they can provide emotional and financial support to such children. This can only be possible if they can be allowed to get married and adopt children.

Many people and groups are increasingly becoming conscious, and more concerned about the human rights. “Another argument that favors same sex marriages is that denying same sex couples legal access to marriage and all of its attendant benefits represents discrimination based on sexual orientation” (Dziengel, 2010). Many people and institutions promoting human rights concur with this assertion. People in same sex unions do not access the rights given to the married people.

Gay couples have faced myriad challenges. Most of them have experienced psychological problems associated with verbal and physical abuse. For example, some of them have been attacked and brutally killed. This is because many people are not wiling to be associated with them hence they always intimidate them. One way of eliminating this stigmatization is by simply making it legal for them to get married.

It has also been noted with a lot of concern that HIV/AIDS is spreading among the gay people because they operate illegally. Marriage would make this people more faithful to their partners. This can reduce the chances of them contracting HIV/AIDS because they will be more responsible.

From the above argument it is very clear that many countries and individuals are increasingly accepting the fact that gay relationships are equally good. It is therefore important for people to stop being conservative only when it comes to marriage, yet they accept other serious changes that take place in their society.

For example, if abortion can be legalized, why no not gay marriages? “Legalizing gay marriages will probably make the social economic and political institutions in our societies more effective” (Smith, 2010). This is because people will have similar goals, and they will not have differences based on sexual orientation. I am therefore optimistic that in the near future many people will support same sex relationships.

Acevado, G., & Wada, R. (2011). Religion and attitudes toward same sex marriages among U.S. Latinos. Wiley -Blackwell Social Science Quarterly , 92, 35-56.

Benard, S. (2009). Heterosexual previlage awareness, previlage and support of gay marriage among diversity course students. EBSCOhost Journal , 58, 3-7.

Dziengel, L. (2010). Advocacy coalitions and punctuated equilibriam in the same sex marriage debate: learning from pro-LGBT policy changes in Minneapolis and Minnesota. Journal of Gay and Lesbian services , 22, 165-182.

Farrior, S. (2009). Human rights advocacy on gender issues: challanges and opportunites. Oxford Journal of Human Rights Practice , 1, 83-100.

Goldberg, A. (2010). Lesbian and gay parents and their children: research on the family life cycle. Claiming a place at the family table: gay and lesbian families in the 21st century , 72, 230-233.

Haider, D., & Joslyn, M. (2008). Belives about the origin of homosexuality and support for gay rights. Oxford Journals public Opinion Quarterly , 72, 291-310.

Ronner, A. (2005). Homophobia and the law (law and public policy). New York: American Psychological Association.

Smith, M. (2010). Gender politics and same sex marriage debate in the United States. Oxford Jourrnals Social Politics , 17, 1-28.

• Gay Marriage and Parenting
• Arguments for Supporting Same-Sex Marriage
• Factors Influencing Perception on Same-sex marriage in the American Society
• Why Gay Marriage Should Not Be Legal
• Gay Marriage Legalization
• Balancing Studies, Work, and Family Life
• Emotions and reasoning
• Correlation Between Multiple Pregnancies and Postpartum Depression or Psychosis
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, August 23). Marriage Equality: Same-Sex Marriage. https://ivypanda.com/essays/same-sex-marriage-2/

"Marriage Equality: Same-Sex Marriage." IvyPanda , 23 Aug. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/same-sex-marriage-2/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Marriage Equality: Same-Sex Marriage'. 23 August.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Marriage Equality: Same-Sex Marriage." August 23, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/same-sex-marriage-2/.

1. IvyPanda . "Marriage Equality: Same-Sex Marriage." August 23, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/same-sex-marriage-2/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Marriage Equality: Same-Sex Marriage." August 23, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/same-sex-marriage-2/.

• South Korea
• Other Countries
• Interesting Facts About

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Same Sex Marriage

Marriage equality is an idea that is sweeping around the developed nations of the world today. Although traditionally marriage has been exclusive to relationships of different genders, same-gender relationships are unlocking the opportunities of government recognition of their partnership. Making same sex marriage a legal opportunity comes with some distinct advantages to each society, but there may be disadvantages to each situation which must be considered as well. Here are some of the key points to think about as you decide where you stand on the idea of marriage equality.

5 Advantages of Same Sex Marriage

1. It creates real equality from a government perspective. If two people of opposite genders can be married, then to be equal, a society must offer that ability to people of the same gender as well if their purpose is to form a long-term relationship. That’s how just about every marriage starts. There is a desire to build a foundation for a lifetime of togetherness.

2. It provides more help. Marriage brings with it certain benefits, like the extension of health care, life insurance benefits, and even inheritance rights. Having same sex marriage within a society allows these rights to extend to partners in a way that civil partnerships don’t always allow. This way, even if a will isn’t necessarily in place, there is still a natural path of secession for that relationship.

3. It offers happiness. In the US, the founding documents state that people have the right to pursue their own happiness. Same sex marriage being a recognized legal contract allows for this to take place for the population that finds this to be an important part of their lives.

4. It provides business opportunities. Now that more people can get legally married, it offers more opportunities to the business sectors which provide wedding services. Photographers, bakers, florists, caterers, and many others have a completely new customer segment to target within their industry, giving them the chance to create many new local economic opportunities.

5. It stops needless violence. In some countries, same gender relationships are punishable by the death penalty or life imprisonment. Many of these nations are in the Middle East. A movement toward marriage equality shows these nations that there is nothing to fear about having a relationship like this.

5 Disadvantages of Same Sex Marriage

1. It creates change. People don’t like change, but that’s more because they fear the future consequences of it rather than the present decisions that are being made. From a fear of God’s wrath to a fear of losing financial benefits, people who are afraid can make very poor decisions to stop those feelings. That can lead to physical, verbal, and spiritual attacks on the LGBTQI community and their supporters.

2. The government structure may not be supportive of the idea. Sometimes changes to the law happen so quickly that supportive laws are unable to keep up. For example: some divorce laws may be specifically structured to only support a divorce between different genders. This would mean a same sex couple could get married, but a local court may not recognize the need for a divorce.

3. It imposes acceptance. It’s true that not everyone may find themselves with same gender attractions. For those that do not, having marriage equality laws in place can seem like an imposition of a choice with society-level consequences on them. It is important to note, however, that those who do have same gender attractions have felt that society has been imposing a standard upon them for several decades. When the tables are reversed, those who benefit from the changes can be just as brutal as those who are fearful of them.

4. Some feel that same sex marriage offends God. From a spiritual standpoint, many have been taught that God forbids a same gender union. This is not because two people of the same gender are unable to love one another, but because of the sexual relationship involved within the marriage union. When the world assumes that God is on their side, terrible things can happen. Terrorism, for example.

5. It changes societal infrastructure. Businesses have to take time and endure costs to adjust to the additional rights granted. Hospital rights, insurance rights, and other changes aren’t always subsidized, which means the business is effectively penalized.

Marriage equality is a subject which brings passionate arguments from both sides. Whether you believe it is the right step to take or is something that is potentially harmful to society, it is important to treat each other with respect in all things. Name calling, insults, and other derogatory comments only prove that instead of evaluating key points like these, a decision has been made on emotions. Let the debate begin, but on the facts involved.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

6 Pros and Cons of Foreign Aid

6 Pros and Cons of Flu Shot

6 Pros and Cons of Flat Tax

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Am J Public Health
• v.103(2); Feb 2013

Same-Sex Legal Marriage and Psychological Well-Being: Findings From the California Health Interview Survey

R. G. Wight designed the study, designed the analytic strategy, conducted the data analysis, and wrote the article. A. J. LeBlanc assisted with the study design, writing of the article, and article preparation. M. V. L. Badgett assisted with the study design, the analytic strategy, and article preparation.

Objectives. We examined whether same-sex marriage was associated with nonspecific psychological distress among self-identified lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults, and whether it had the potential to offset mental health disparities between lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and heterosexuals.

Methods. Population-based data (weighted) were from the 2009 adult (aged 18–70 years) California Health Interview Survey. Within-group analysis of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons included 1166 individuals (weighted proportion = 3.15%); within-group heterosexual analysis included 35 608 individuals (weighted proportion = 96.58%); and pooled analysis of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and heterosexuals included 36 774 individuals.

Results. Same-sex married lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons were significantly less distressed than lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons not in a legally recognized relationship; married heterosexuals were significantly less distressed than nonmarried heterosexuals. In adjusted pairwise comparisons, married heterosexuals had the lowest psychological distress, and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons who were not in legalized relationships had the highest psychological distress ( P  < .001). Psychological distress was not significantly distinguishable among same-sex married lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in registered domestic partnerships, and heterosexuals.

Conclusions. Being in a legally recognized same-sex relationship, marriage in particular, appeared to diminish mental health differentials between heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Researchers must continue to examine potential health benefits of same-sex marriage, which is at least in part a public health issue.

Well-established research demonstrates that lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons have worse mental health outcomes than their heterosexual counterparts, highlighting important but poorly understood mental health disparities associated with sexual orientation. 1 For example, a meta-analysis of 4 decades of research concluded that lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons had higher rates of mental disorder, substance misuse, suicidal ideation, and self-harm than did heterosexuals. 2 Research that examines both population- and individual-level outcomes supports the theory that sexual minority stressors (e.g., stigma or expectations of rejection, experiences of discrimination, internalized homophobia, the need for concealment of sexual identity) might be at the root of this disparity because they strain lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons’ abilities to adapt to and function in their everyday environments, increasing risks for poor mental health. 3–8

Extensive research also provides broad evidence that individuals in heterosexual marriages, on average, experience better mental health outcomes than their unmarried counterparts. 9–11 This differential might stem from tangible economic benefits (e.g., access to health insurance) or a heightened sense of relationship stability associated with legal recognition of the marital commitment, the positive effects of intimacy and closeness, as well as from greater emotional support and self-worth conferred to the married. 1

Taken together, these 2 large bodies of work suggest that lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons might be uniquely disadvantaged because they endure sexual minority-related stressors and challenges not experienced by heterosexuals, and in most parts of the United States, they are denied access to legal marriage, which potentially could enhance their mental health in the same ways it does for heterosexuals. In 2009, the American Medical Association officially recognized that exclusion from legal marriage among sexual minorities contributes to health care disparities in same-sex households, 12 yet very little research has examined the potential mental health benefits of permitting lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons to legally marry someone of the same sex. To date, the best evidence has come from small-scale nonrepresentative studies, which suggest that, like their heterosexual counterparts, sexual minority persons realize psychological benefits from same-sex legal marriage and other types of legally recognized same-sex relationships (e.g., civil unions, registered domestic partnerships [RDPs]). 13,14

Beginning in June 2008, same-sex couples were allowed to legally marry in California. A statewide referendum (Proposition 8) overturned this legal right in November 2008, putting a halt to all new same-sex marriages. In 2010, Proposition 8 was overturned by a US District Court, a decision recently twice affirmed by the US Court of Appeals. As of this writing, the issue is with the US Supreme Court and the status of same-sex marriage in California is in flux: existing same-sex marriages stand, but no new same-sex marriages are legally permitted. Also, since 2000, lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons may enter a RDP with a same-sex partner in California. A 2005 law enhanced the status of RDP to include almost all of the state-provided rights and responsibilities of marriage.

This study analyzed population-based data from the 2009 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) to investigate the association between legal marriage and mental health among heterosexual and lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults aged 18 to 70 years, as well as the potential relationship between same-sex marriage and mental health disparities based on sexual orientation. Given the apparent mental health benefits of marriage found in previous research, we hypothesized that lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in legal same-sex marriages and partnerships would experience better mental health than lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons not in same-sex legal relationships. Consistent with the previously described findings, we also hypothesized that married heterosexuals would report lower psychological distress than unmarried heterosexuals. Further, we hypothesized that mental health disparities between lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and heterosexuals would be diminished when same-sex relationship status was taken into account, given the tangible and emotional benefits that accrue with legal marriage.

Data were from the 2009 adult CHIS. 15 Conducted by telephone every 2 years, the CHIS is the nation’s largest population-based state health survey. The CHIS has been a leader in telephone survey methodology and employs a multistage sample design with random-digit-dial (RDD) sampling that includes both landline and cellular telephone numbers to enhance coverage. For the landline RDD sample, the state was divided into 56 geographic sampling strata, including 2 counties with subcounty strata, 41 single-county strata, and 3 multicounty strata. Within each stratum, residential telephones were selected, and within each household, 1 adult (aged ≥ 18 years) was randomly selected. A separate RDD sample was drawn of telephone numbers assigned to cellular service. The cell RDD sample was stratified by area code, and 1 adult household member was randomly selected from cell-only households.

The sample size was 47 614 adults. The overall household response rate (a product of the screener response rate, 36.1%, and the extended adult response rate, 49.0%, landline and cellular numbers combined) was 17.7% and was roughly comparable to other large telephone surveys specific to California at around the same time, such as the 2009 California Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey. 16 RDD response rates have declined in recent years, a trend at least partly caused by the proliferation of telemarketing and telephone screening devices. 17 However, emerging studies show that RDD response rates should not be the sole criteria in rating data quality or survey representativeness because there might be little correlation between response rates and nonresponse bias. 18 CHIS researchers conducted extensive data quality studies to assess methodological issues related to nonresponse and noncoverage biases with CHIS data and consistently found that the data accurately represented California’s household population. 19 Detailed information about CHIS methodology can be found at the CHIS data quality Web site ( http://www.chis.ucla.edu/dataquality.html ).

Adults aged 70 years and younger were asked, “Do you think of yourself as straight or heterosexual, as {gay/gay,lesbian} or homosexual, or bisexual?” The analytic sample for within-group lesbian, gay, and bisexual analysis included those who responded that they were gay, lesbian, homosexual, or bisexual (n = 1166). After the application of sample weights, this number represented 3.15% of the 70-years-and-younger adult California population (weighted n = 777 508). The analytic sample for within-group heterosexual analysis included those who reported they were straight or heterosexual (n = 35 608). After the application of sample weights, this number represented 96.85% of the 70-years-and-younger adult California population. For a small number of cases, respondents reported exclusively engaging in sexual behavior that did not “match” their marital status (i.e., being in a same-sex marriage but having only different-sex partners, n = 12; being in a different-sex marriage but having only same-sex partners, n = 28); these cases were omitted from the analysis. These omissions did not affect the findings presented. Heterosexual RDPs were not assessed in the CHIS. The pooled lesbian, gay, bisexual, and heterosexual analysis included 36 774 individuals. Nonheterosexuals who reported being “not sexual,” celibate, or “other” were excluded from the analysis. Transgender identity was not assessed in the CHIS.

Psychological distress.

The dependent variable was nonspecific psychological distress, as measured with a continuous form of the widely used Kessler 6 (K6) screening scale, 20 which asks how often in the past 30 days (responses scored from 0 [none of the time] to 4 [all of the time]) respondents felt nervous, hopeless, restless, fidgety, so depressed that nothing could cheer them up, everything was an effort, and worthless. Responses were summed (possible range = 0–24). The continuous form of the K6 was used rather than the dichotomous form (cutoff score of “13+” = possible serious mental illness) to capture the full range of psychological distress, including subsyndromal symptomatology.

Legal relationship status.

Nonheterosexual respondents were asked, “Are you legally registered as a domestic partner or legally married in California with someone of the same sex?” RDP and same-sex legal marriage responses were mutually exclusive. We referred to a lesbian, gay, or bisexual person who was legally married as “same-sex married” to clearly distinguish individuals with same-sex and different-sex spouses. Heterosexual marriage was assessed with the question, “Are you now married, living with a partner in a marriage-like relationship, widowed, divorced, separated, or never married?” (responses were mutually exclusive).

Sociodemographic controls.

Multiple sociodemographic variables that might influence observed findings were controlled in the analysis:

• gender (male or female)
• ethnicity (Asian or Asian Pacific Islander, African American, Hispanic, Non-Hispanic White, and other),
• age (categorized because of its known nonlinear association with psychological distress, such that, on average, distress is high in young adulthood, then decreases, and then increases in old age, 21 18–29, 30–39, 40–49, 50–59, 60–70 years),
• education (< high school, high school, some college, ≥ college degree),
• whether English was the primary language spoken in the home (yes or no),
• employment status (works now vs not),
• health insurance status (has insurance vs not),
• whether the respondent lives in an urban area (yes or no),
• whether household income was below the 2008 California median household income level of $61 000 (yes or no), 22
• self-rated fair or poor health (yes or no).

Analyses were conducted with the Stata SVY procedure (StataCorp, College Station, TX), which accounts for sample weights and the complex survey sampling design. Associations between relationship status and psychological distress, adjusted for sociodemographic controls, were first assessed with ordinary least-squares SVY regression models (within-group lesbian, gay, and bisexual association, within-group heterosexual association, pooled lesbian, gay, and bisexual–heterosexual association). Adjusted means for psychological distress by relationship status were then assessed with the Stata ANOVALATOR procedure, which provides adjusted pairwise comparisons. Because of multiple comparisons, a P value of .05 was divided by the number of paired comparisons made to determine the significance level.

Sample characteristics of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons (weighted) are shown in Table 1 . Most lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in California were not in a legally recognized same-sex marriage or domestic partnership. The proportion in same-sex marriages (7.13%) was nearly identical to recent US Census Bureau Reports, 23 and the proportion in RDPs was also comparable to recent estimates (12.35%). 24 Slightly more than half of heterosexual adults in California were currently married, similar to recent national estimates. 25

TABLE 1—

Weighted Characteristics of California Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Persons and Heterosexuals Aged 18–70 Years in 2009 by Legal Relationship Status

Note . Neither = neither same-sex married nor RDP; RDP = registered domestic partnership. The unweighted sample sizes were n = 1166 for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and 35 608 for heterosexuals.

In the CHIS lesbian, gay, and bisexual subsample, men outnumbered women, ethnicity and age were roughly comparable to the California population, 26 nearly half had a college degree or more, most spoke English in their homes, were currently employed, had health insurance, and had household incomes below the 2008 California median level. A majority (94.72%) lived in urban areas. About one fifth rated their health as fair or poor. Heterosexuals were roughly similar to lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, with the exception of education (lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons were more educated) and English being the primary language spoken at home (lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons were more likely to live in homes where English was the primary language).

Comparisons among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons who reported being in legal same-sex marriages, RDPs, and neither of these legal arrangements revealed wide variation for some characteristics ( Table 1 ). For example, lesbian or bisexual women were more likely to be in same-sex marriages than gay or bisexual men, whereas gay or bisexual men were more likely to be in RDPs. Among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, non-Hispanic Whites were disproportionately more likely than other ethnicities to be in either type of legally recognized union, as were late middle-aged persons and those with more socioeconomic resources (education, employment, health insurance, income). Such relationship-related disparities were less evident among heterosexuals, although married heterosexuals had more socioeconomic resources than nonmarried heterosexuals.

Association Between Psychological Distress and Relationship Status

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons..

As shown in Table 2 , model 1, same-sex married lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons were significantly less distressed than lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons not in a same-sex legal relationship. The level of distress among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in RDPs was not significantly different than that of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons not in a legal relationship. Model 1 also showed that among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, psychological distress was negatively associated with being male, older, and currently employed, whereas it was positively associated with living in a home in which English was the primary language spoken. Model 1 accounted for 16% of the variance in psychological distress.

TABLE 2—

Parameter Estimates (weighted) for Psychological Distress Among Californians Aged 18–70 Years in 2009

Heterosexuals.

Model 2 in Table 2 shows that married heterosexuals were significantly less distressed than nonmarried heterosexuals. Model 2 also indicated that among heterosexuals, psychological distress was negatively associated with being Asian or Asian Pacific Islander or Hispanic (compared with being non-Hispanic White), being older, having a high school education or more, and being currently employed. Distress was positively associated with living in an urban area, having a household income lower than the median California household income, and reporting fair or poor health. Model 2 accounted for 12% of the variance in psychological distress.

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and heterosexuals pooled.

Model 3 in Table 2 shows that psychological distress was lower among married heterosexuals, unmarried heterosexuals, and same-sex married lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons than among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons not in a legally recognized relationship (the omitted reference group). The estimate for same-sex RDP was not significant. The association between the control variables and psychological distress was nearly identical to model 2 (the heterosexual model).

Adjusted Mean Psychological Distress Scores

As shown in Table 3 , adjusted pairwise comparisons (controlling for sociodemographics, statistical significance set at P  < .017 to adjust for 3 comparisons) indicated that psychological distress was significantly higher among persons who were not in any type of same-sex legal union than in those in a same-sex marriage, but not compared with those in an RDP. Differences in mean psychological distress scores between persons in same-sex marriages and RDPs were nonsignificant ( P  > .05).

TABLE 3—

Psychological Distress Scores (Kessler 6) by Legal Relationship Status among Californians Aged 18–70 Years in 2009, Weighted and Adjusted for Sociodemographic Characteristics

Note. RDP = registered domestic partnership.

Adjusted pairwise comparisons (controlling for sociodemographics, statistical significance set at P  < .05 to adjust for 1 comparison) indicated that psychological distress was significantly higher ( P  < .001) among unmarried heterosexuals than among those who were married ( Table 3 ).

The overall mean psychological distress score (adjusted and weighted) for heterosexuals (4.01; SE = 0.10) was significantly ( P  < .001) lower than that for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons (5.25; SE = 0.26), consistent with previous research. 2 As shown in Table 3 , adjusted pairwise comparisons (controlling for sociodemographics, statistical significance set at P  < .005 to adjust for 10 comparisons) indicated that married heterosexuals had the lowest psychological distress, and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons who were not in any legalized relationship had the highest psychological distress, a significant difference ( P  < .001). Psychological distress was not significantly distinguishable among same-sex married lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in RDPs, and heterosexuals of any marital status. Same-sex married lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons were significantly less distressed than were lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons who were not in legal relationships ( P  < .001).

Supplemental Analysis

Because there did not appear to be significant differences in psychological distress between lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in same-sex marriages and RDPs, supplemental analyses of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual analytical sample were conducted to test associations between each relationship type and psychological distress when added individually to the adjusted model. Postestimation Wald tests indicated that the association between same-sex marriage and psychological distress was significantly different from 0 ( F [1,79] = 6.98; P  = .01), but this was not the case for the association between same-sex RDP and psychological distress ( F [1,79] = 0.01; P  = .92). Thus, although direct mental health differences between same-sex marriage and RDP were not detected among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, it appears there might be a unique positive mental health association specifically conferred by legal marriage, particularly compared with not being in any type of legally recognized relationship at all.

Findings presented here add to the very small body of work aimed at exploring associations between being in a same-sex legal marriage and mental health among sexual minorities. With data from a population-based sample representative of Californians aged 18 to 70 years, we found results similar to those found in small-scale studies. These data suggested that psychological distress might be lower among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in same-sex marriages compared with those not in any type of legally recognized same-sex union. This association was statistically significant even when controlling for myriad sociodemographic characteristics related to mental health.

There was no significant difference in psychological distress between persons in same-sex marriages and RDPs. However, consistent with previous work, 14 supplemental analyses suggested that same-sex marriage might be the more beneficial legal arrangement for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in terms of their mental health. Future studies that explore the mechanisms by which this benefit might arise are needed.

Perhaps most importantly, findings additionally indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in psychological distress between heterosexual individuals and same-sex married lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in RDPs, and that persons in each of these relationship categories had significantly lower distress scores than did lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons not in any type of legally recognized relationship, net of a range of sociodemographic control variables. Legal recognition of same-sex relationships, legal marriage in particular, thus appeared to have potential to offset mental health disparities between heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons.

Previous research has suggested that the positive association between psychiatric disorders and being lesbian, gay, or bisexual was stronger in states that did not specifically protect sexual minorities from hate crimes or employment discrimination. 27 In addition, it has been shown that rates of psychiatric disorders actually increased among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in states that enacted constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage. 28 These associations were hypothesized to stem from social stress derived from institutionalized discrimination, one aspect of sexual minority stress. 8 Our findings were consistent with this work, in that sexual minority stressors, such as stigma, prejudice, internalized homophobia, and identity concealment, 8 might play a role in how same-sex marriage manifests in psychological well-being. Being legally married might negate or “buffer” 29 the mental health impact of these stressors at the individual level and might offset the larger macro-level effects of sanctioned discrimination. Much more research is needed that identifies pathways by which same-sex marriage might affect mental health.

As previously described, we operationalized psychological distress with a continuous version of the K6 to capture the full range of the severity of distress experiences, including subsyndromal symptomatology. The K6 was originally designed to screen for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-4th Edition ( DSM-IV ) serious mental illness, defined as any DSM-IV mental disorder within a particular time frame, with a cutoff score of 13+ signifying possible serious mental illness. 20 Continuous operationalization of the K6 allowed us to examine associations between legal relationship status and a unit change (i.e., frequency of experiencing symptoms) in nonspecific psychological distress rather than comparing persons at the extreme end of the symptom spectrum from the majority of persons who either were asymptomatic or were symptomatic but did not meet diagnostic screening criteria, an approach that discards information about the full distress continuum. When we reran the adjusted within-group lesbian, gay, and bisexual analysis with the K6 dichotomized and made subsequent pairwise comparisons, the proportion of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons who were screened as potentially seriously mentally ill did not differ across relationship status. In the pooled analyses, the proportion of persons who met diagnostic criteria did not significantly differ between heterosexuals, lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in same-sex marriages, and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in RDPs, however it did differ between heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons not in a legally recognized relationship. Thus, even when analyses separated individuals who were most likely to experience a diagnosable disorder from those who were not, legal recognition of same-sex relationships still appeared to diminish known mental health differentials between heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons.

Study Limitations

Limitations to this investigation included the cross-sectional nature of the analysis, which precluded definitively establishing the causal directions of the observed associations. Longitudinal studies on the health benefits (or lack thereof) of same-sex marriage are needed to clarify the directionality of findings, in particular, reverse causation and selection effects. Although most longitudinal research suggests that entering into marriage is associated with increases in psychological well-being and decreases in psychological distress among heterosexuals (i.e., no selection effect), the magnitude of this protective effect appears to be smaller than that found in cross-sectional studies, 11 and caution should be used in ascribing a marriage effect to the marital relationship per se. Because the time period during which same-sex couples could marry in California was brief, lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in relatively good health might have been most likely and able to take advantage of this narrow window of opportunity, enhancing the possibility of a selection of healthier individuals into same-sex marriage.

There was also the possibility that multiple unobserved confounding variables were responsible for the significant same-sex marriage finding. For example, it could be that unmeasured environmental or personality factors attenuated the association between same-sex marriage and psychological distress. In addition, self-reporting of same-sex marriage is subject to bias, and it was possible that some of the legal same-sex marriages actually reported were not legal marriages, but were “marriage-like” relationships, leading to false-positive reports of legal marriages. Such a bias would suggest that the relationship itself matters more to mental health than the legal status of the relationship. Furthermore, marriage dissolution data (widowhood, separation, divorce) were available for heterosexuals but not for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, precluding us from systematically comparing mental health differentials among subgroups of nonmarried heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Future studies are needed to examine how marriage dissolution and many other confounding variables might be associated with sexual minority mental health. Marriage tenure was not assessed for either heterosexuals or lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. It was also likely that some of the “neither same-sex married nor RDP” individuals were in long-term relationships that had no legal recognition: the CHIS did not differentiate these individuals from other lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, preventing us from partitioning out specific associations for this group.

Conclusions

The findings presented here offer empirical evidence that same-sex marriage might be positively associated with psychological well-being in lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, and that same-sex marriage might also be associated with the mental health disparity between heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. This finding emerged despite the fact that lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in same-sex marriages, in California and any US state, do not enjoy the same level of social support or government recognition and benefits that those in different-sex marriages do. Given that same-sex marriage was the better predictor of psychological well-being than same-sex RDP, these findings suggest that potential mental health benefits might incrementally accrue with access to relationships that offer greater degrees of social and legal recognition. Mental health benefits of same-sex marriage might in part be derived from a heightened sense of social inclusion concomitant with the social institution of marriage. 30 Given these results, researchers should continue to examine the potential health benefits of legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide and re-legalizing same-sex marriage in California. In short, this research showed that same-sex marriage among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons in the United States is at least in part a public health concern.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Williams Institute, University of California, Los Angeles School of Law (R. G. W., Principal Investigator). We thank David Grant and Steven P. Wallace for data assistance.

Human Participant Protection

This research was approved by the University of California, Los Angeles, Office for the Protection of Research Subjects.

• Advocate Newsletter

Search form

By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Private Policy and Terms of Use .

Here are all the ways marriage equality has been 'unambiguously positive' for America

The study from the RAND Corp. comes 20 years after the first legal marriages for same-sex couples took place in Massachusetts.

When marriage equality was but a dream, right-wingers alleged that somehow it would cheapen marriage. Twenty years after the first same-sex couples married in Massachusetts, a new study proclaims that’s not the case.

Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ + news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.

“For LGBT individuals and same-sex couples, their children, and the general U.S. population, the benefits of access to legal marriage for same-sex couples are unambiguously positive,” says the study by the RAND Corp ., a nonprofit research organization.

The study’s authors reviewed the existing research on the effects of marriage equality — 96 studies — and conducted their own new analyses. They found that “when states legalized marriage for same-sex couples, the physical health of LGBT individuals in those states improved; state-level rates of syphilis, HIV, and AIDS fell significantly; same-sex households in those states experienced more-stable relationships, higher earnings, and higher rates of homeownership; and sexual orientation–motivated hate crimes and employment discrimination against LGBT individuals declined,” the study says.

“Children of same-sex couples benefited when their parents were granted access to legal marriage, and state-level adoption rates rose after marriage became legal for same-sex couples,” it continues.

There was “no evidence for a retreat from marriage,” the study notes. “New marriages increased by 1 percent to 2 percent among different-sex couples and about 10 percent overall,” it says, and there was “no consistent evidence” that cohabitation increased among unmarried different-sex couples or that divorces increased as a result of marriage equality.

“Some of those who opposed the granting of marriage rights to same-sex couples predicted that doing so would undermine the institution of marriage, resulting in fewer couples marrying, more couples divorcing, and an overall retreat from family formation,” study coauthor Benjamin R. Karney said in a RAND press release. “Overall, the fears of opponents of same-sex marriage simply have not come to pass.” Karney is a psychology professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and adjunct researcher at RAND.

“We find no evidence for a retreat from marriage,” added coauthor Melanie A. Zaber, a RAND economist. “In fact, there is evidence suggesting that by extending marriage rights to a greater number of couples, interest in marriage increased. And that finding isn't limited to same-sex couples — this is also true for the broader population.”

The first state-sanctioned same-sex marriages took place May 17, 2004, in Massachusetts. The state’s Supreme Judicial Court had ruled in November 2003 that same-sex couples had the right to marry under the Massachusetts constitution. There was a six-month waiting period for the ruling to go into effect, during which four lawsuits sought to block it, but none succeeded.

After marriage equality became a reality in Massachusetts, more than 30 states and the District of Columbia legalized same-sex marriage, either by legislation or court action. A few states continued to ban it, but those bans were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in its Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in 2015. In 2022, Congress passed and President Joe Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act, which will protect marriage equality in federal law if the Supreme Court reverses itself — a real threat, given the conservative makeup of the court and the stated views of some justices, should a case involving marriage equality reach it.

The study further notes that states that acted early on marriage equality saw economic benefits. Brad Sears, a coauthor of the study and founding executive director of the Williams Institute, a think tank at UCLA’s law school, presented findings from the research Monday at Out Leadership’s US Summit 2024. Companies in states that had passed marriage equality saw an increase in their stock prices, and the number of applications filed for patents rose in those states, he reported.

“In a dollar-and-cents way, if people can bring their full selves to work, they tend to be happier, more creative, and participate more,” he said.

The full study can be downloaded here.

• People of the Year: Anthony & the Supremes ›
• 5 Things SCOTUS Justices Alito and Thomas Said About Marriage Equality ›
• Karine Jean-Pierre Reflects on Historic Marriage Act Signing ›
• Rights Groups, Elected Officials Applaud Respect for Marriage Act ›
• Marriage Equality Is Now Federal Law After President Biden Signs Act ›

Want more breaking equality news & trending entertainment stories?

Check out our NEW 24/7 streaming service: the Advocate Channel!

Download the Advocate Channel App for your mobile phone and your favorite streaming device!

APPLE STORE - GOOGLE PLAY

ROKU - APPLE TV - FIRE TV - GOOGLE TV

From our Sponsors

Most popular, meet all 37 of the queer women in this season's wnba.

17 Celebs Who Are Out & Proud of Their Trans & Nonbinary Kids

Which state is the queerest these are the states with the most lgbtq+ people, these 27 senate hearing room gay sex jokes are truly exquisite, here are the 15 gayest travel destinations in the world: report, 13 lgbtq+ british royals in history, black transgender woman starr brown shot to death in memphis. her coworker has confessed to the killing, these are the 5 states with the smallest percentage of lgbtq+ people, 25 pics of hot, shirtless celebs just to remind us of warmer weather, 13 of the most batsh*t things n.c. republican governor candidate mark robinson has said, latest stories, a local nbc anchor came out as gay on live tv. now, he shares how the moment has changed his life, it's now illegal for minnesota  libraries to ban lgbtq+ books under this new law, mike johnson flies same christian nationalist flag outside his office that samuel alito flew at vacation home, 13-year-old kid arrested on hate crime charges for anti-lgbtq+ pipe attack in brooklyn, man pleads guilty to using explicit selfies to extort, cyberstalk grindr victims, grammy-winner shelby lynne's 'over and over' is a smoky, searing ode to past love, transgender 17-year-old tayy dior thomas shot to death in alabama, doug emhoff at nyc event: book banning ‘erodes our democracy’, dwyane wade and transgender daughter zaya launch new resource for trans youth and families, trump campaign outraged over queer apprentice film, calling it ‘garbage’ and ‘pure fiction’, drag queen story hour u.k. founder suffers antigay attack after proposing to boyfriend, jon lovett of pod save america is a contestant on survivor’s upcoming 47th season, ufc star bryce mitchell will homeschool his son so he doesn't 'end up turning gay', national park service cracks down on pride leaving lgbtq+ rangers feeling betrayed, stream on advocate channel: marti cummings reigns supreme in ‘queen of new york’ doc, watch randy rainbow channel dolly parton to lampoon trump in 'forty-five', south carolina governor signs extreme gender-affirming care ban into law, effective immediately, mark robinson, north carolina antigay governor hopeful, condemned public spending while benefiting from it, amber rose, 'slut walk' organizer, turns away from feminism and endorses donald trump, trans woman michelle henry strangled, stabbed to death in san francisco, trending stories.

Living la vida ‘Love Boat’ on the Discovery Princess

Advocacy in action with AIDSWatch

10 times 'Glee' was the best LGBTQ+ show on TV

My first queer cruise threw all expectations overboard

All 6 rogue Mississippi cops got long prison sentences in 'Goon Squad' torture of 2 Black men

Marvel's 'Agatha' finally has a REAL title — can you guess what it is? (Updated)

‘Bridgerton’ stars Nicola Coughlan & Luke Newton on getting OUT of the friendzone

‘Ozempic babies’: Reports of surprise pregnancies raise new questions about weight loss drugs

Buh-Bye! These 11 LGBTQ-inclusive shows are ending in 2024

The 10 most-followed 'Drag Race' queens across Instagram, Twitter & TikTok

Justice Dept plans to reschedule marijuana as a lower-risk drug

How climate disasters hurt mental health in young people

These are the celebs who came out in 2024 (so far)

As Pride party season begins, the CDC urges mpox vaccinations

Ptown is ‘Reimagining Queer Africa’ for Pride 2024

Joe Biden has tied the record for most LGBTQ+ judges confirmed in federal courts

Here's everything we know about Luca Guadagnino's next sexy AF film 'Queer'

France becomes world’s first country to enshrine abortion rights in constitution

Elon Musk uses burner accounts on X, doesn’t fact-check: report

Hulu's 'Black Twitter' producers on trailer backlash: 'You got to welcome the smoke'

Kaskade says 'lives will change' during his set at EDC Las Vegas 2024

10 queer albums Apple Music SHOULD have put on its 100 best albums list

The Talk: Starting your journey with HIV

10 thirsty pics celebrating DJ Dani Brasil’s Capital Pride debut

​Ricky Martin opens up on his spicy thirst traps and why he wants to 'come out again'

Most recent.

Celebrities stand up for brain health at the Power of Love gala in Las Vegas

Election season got you down? This crisis line is soothing LGBTQ+ mental health

PRIDE NEWSLETTER - 5/24/24

The Talk: Finding balance with HIV

Charlotte LGBTQ+ travel: Discover pride in North Carolina

Dressed up or dressed down? 25 celebs who look great going both ways

How The Stonewall Gives Back Initiative empowers equality with its impactful legacy

Joe Biden launches ‘Out for Biden-Harris’ campaign initiative to engage & woo LGBTQ+ voters (exclusive)

21 pics of Orville Peck that'll make you frequently fond of cowboys

Savor vibrant bites as the best traveling queer food festival continues its journey east

Giselle Byrd is taking center stage — and helping others do the same

Carrie Underwood solidifies herself as a can't-miss entertainer in Las Vegas

The Talk: Thriving with HIV

Vanessa Hudgens teases a potential music return & reveals why she's leaving 'High School Musical' behind

The rise of the soft jock and 10 of our favorite queer candidates

'X-Men '97' creator Beau DeMayo is a sexy beast & the gays are FERAL

16 Republican AGs threaten Maine over protections for trans care and abortion

Julio Torres explores a fantastical & queer New York in 'Fantasmas' trailer

The menthol diaries: Taking back pride from tobacco

Emma Corrin on coming out as nonbinary, “the vitriol [was] worse than I anticipated”

The Talk: What HIV isn’t

Before AIDS, gay artist Rex drew hot men on the prowl — then he disappeared

Federal judge grants Casa Ruby founder Ruby Corado pre-trial release from D.C. jail

Meet the fiery queens competing on 'Drag Race México' season 2

Fake Biden poster ROASTING Trump for dancing like he's getting down with dudes has us CACKLING

Recommended stories for you.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

How people around the world view same-sex marriage

Attitudes about same-sex marriage vary widely around the world, according to several Pew Research Center surveys fielded in 32 places in the last two years. Among the surveyed publics, support for legal same-sex marriage is highest in Sweden, where 92% of adults favor it, and lowest in Nigeria, where only 2% back it.

In the United States, where the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationally in 2015, 63% of adults support it and 34% oppose it. But views are highly fractured along political and demographic lines.

For example, Democrats and independents who lean toward the Democratic Party are nearly twice as likely as Republicans and Republican leaners to support same-sex marriage rights (82% vs. 44%). Similarly, nearly three-quarters (73%) of Americans under the age of 40 say they favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally – 16 percentage points higher than the share of Americans 40 and older who agree (57%).

Related : In places where same-sex marriages are legal, they account for a small share of all marriages

Below is a closer look at how attitudes about same-sex marriage differ around the world, based on our surveys. This analysis looks at how attitudes vary by geography, demographic factors, political ideology and religion, as well as how views have changed over time.

This Pew Research Center analysis focuses on public opinion of the legality of same-sex marriage in 32 places in North America, Europe, the Middle East, Latin America, Africa and the Asia-Pacific region. This is the first year since 2019 that the Global Attitudes Survey has included publics from Africa and Latin America, which were not included more recently due to the coronavirus outbreak .

For non-U.S. data, this analysis draws from three nationally representative surveys conducted across 31 publics. In 21 publics, we conducted a survey of 24,546 adults from Feb. 20 to May 22, 2023. All interviews were conducted over the phone in Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Interviews were conducted face-to-face in Hungary, Poland, India, Indonesia, Israel, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil and Mexico. In Australia, we used a mixed-mode probability-based online panel.

Data for Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam draws on another survey of 10,390 adults conducted in five Asian publics from June 2 to Sept. 17, 2023. All interviews in Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan were conducted over the phone. Interviews were conducted face-to-face in Vietnam.

Data for Cambodia, Malaysia, Singapore, Sri Lanka and Thailand draws on a third survey of 10,551 adults conducted in five South and Southeast Asian publics from June 1 to Sept. 4, 2022. All interviews in Malaysia and Singapore were conducted over the phone. Interviews were conducted face-to-face in Cambodia, Sri Lanka and Thailand. Both the survey in East Asia and the one in South and Southeast Asia are part of the  Pew-Templeton Global Religious Futures project , which analyzes religious change and its impact on societies around the world.

In the United States, we surveyed 3,576 U.S. adults from March 20 to 26, 2023. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Respondents for all surveys were selected using probability-based sample designs. In Thailand, we conducted additional interviews in the Southern region, which has larger shares who are Muslim. The data in all publics is weighted to account for different probabilities of selection among respondents and to align with demographic benchmarks for adult populations.

This post is an update of one published June 13, 2023. This new post includes more publics surveyed. It also uses a different rounding procedure to generate the “total” figures, so results may differ slightly from previously published estimates. The accompanying topline figures are unchanged.

Here are the questions used for the analysis , along with responses, and the survey methodology .

How attitudes about same-sex marriage vary geographically

People in Western Europe stand out as staunch supporters of same-sex marriage. At least eight-in-ten adults support it in Sweden (92%), the Netherlands (89%), Spain (87%), France (82%) and Germany (80%). In each of these places, the practice is legal .

In Italy, where issues of LGBTQ+ rights have been in the headlines , 73% of adults favor same-sex marriage rights, though it is not legal there.

Around three-quarters (74%) of adults in the United Kingdom also support same-sex marriage. The practice is legal in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, although those laws were approved at various times over the past decade.

At the other end of the spectrum in Europe, just 41% of adults in Poland and 31% in Hungary support same-sex marriage. In both places, same-sex marriage is not legal, and LGBTQ+ rights are a political and social flashpoint .

In North America, around eight-in-ten Canadians (79%) support same-sex marriage, as do 63% in both the U.S. and Mexico. Same-sex marriage is legal in all three places.

Related : About six-in-ten Americans say legalization of same-sex marriage is good for society

In South America, 67% of Argentines and 52% of Brazilians support the right of gay and lesbian people to marry. Both places have also legalized the practice.

Asia-Pacific

In the Asia-Pacific region, support for same-sex marriage is highest in Australia and Japan. Three-quarters of adults in Australia and nearly seven-in-ten (68%) in Japan favor legal same-sex marriage. But while many Australians who favor same-sex marriage say they strongly support it (52%), support is weaker in Japan , where a 56% majority somewhat favor legal same-sex marriage. Australia has legalized same-sex marriage, but Japan has not .

Views toward legalizing same-sex marriage are similarly favorable in Vietnam, where 65% say they support it.

In India , 53% of adults say same-sex marriage should be legal, while 43% oppose it. The Indian Supreme Court recently rejected a petition to legalize same-sex marriage. (The survey there was conducted prior to the ruling.)

And in Taiwan, roughly equal shares say they support (45%) and oppose (43%) same-sex marriage, with the remainder providing no answer. Taiwan is the only place in Asia where same-sex marriage is legal .

In South Korea, same-sex marriage is not legal, though some lawmakers have proposed changing this . Among South Koreans, 41% favor legal same-sex marriage and 56% oppose it.

Indonesians are highly opposed to same-sex marriage legalization. Roughly nine-in-ten (92%) oppose allowing gays and lesbians to marry, including 88% who say they strongly oppose it. Just 5% of Indonesians support same-sex marriage.

Related : Asian views of same-sex marriage

Africa and Middle East

South Africa remains the only place in Africa where same-sex marriage is legal, having codified it in 2006. Nevertheless, 59% of South Africans oppose the practice.

Nigerians and Kenyans are the least supportive of same-sex marriage rights among the places in Africa surveyed. In Nigeria, where homosexuality is illegal, only 2% of adults say they support allowing gays and lesbians to marry. And in Kenya, just 9% favor it.

In the Middle East, 56% of Israelis are also opposed to making same-sex marriage legal. Religious affiliation and political leanings heavily shape views of same-sex marriage rights in Israel .

How attitudes about same-sex marriage vary by demographic factors

In 21 of the places surveyed, adults under the age of 35 are more likely than their older counterparts to say they favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally. And in some places, older adults are less likely to provide a response than younger adults.

The age gap is greatest in Taiwan. Three-quarters of Taiwanese adults under 35 express support for same-sex marriage, compared with roughly a third of those 35 and older.

In 19 of the surveyed places, women are more likely than men to say they support allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally.

For example, in Australia, 83% of women favor it, compared with 67% of men.

There are similar gender differences in Argentina, Cambodia, Germany, Greece, Japan, Poland, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka and Taiwan.

Education and income

In 22 of the surveyed places, people with more education are more likely than those with less education to support allowing gays and lesbians to marry. In some places, those with less education are less likely to provide a response than those with more education.

Similarly, in 10 places, people with incomes over the national average are more likely than those with incomes at or below the median to support same-sex marriage. In one of these places – Poland – those with lower incomes were less likely to provide a response.

How attitudes about same-sex marriage vary by political ideology

Views on same-sex marriage are related to political ideology in 15 of the 18 places where we asked about respondents’ ideology this year. In these places, those on the ideological left are significantly more likely than those on the right to favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally.

The ideological difference is greatest in the U.S., where liberals are 54 points more likely than conservatives to support same-sex marriage (90% vs. 36%). Still, in nine surveyed places, majorities of those on both the right and left say they support same-sex marriage.

How attitudes about same-sex marriage vary by religion

Support for legal same-sex marriage tends to be lower in places where more people say religion is somewhat or very important in their lives. Support is higher in places where fewer people consider religion important.

In Nigeria, 99% of adults say religion is at least somewhat important in their lives and only 2% favor legal same-sex marriage. In Indonesia, where 100% of Indonesians say religion is important to them, 5% support legal same-sex marriage. In Sweden, by comparison, just 20% of adults consider religion important to them – and 92% favor allowing gay and lesbian people to wed.

Similarly, people who are not affiliated with a religion are much more likely to say they support same-sex marriage. In Australia, for example, 89% of religiously unaffiliated adults say they favor same-sex marriage, compared with 64% of adults with a religious affiliation.

Together, the most recent surveys show some additional patterns by religion:

• Religiously unaffiliated Americans (85%) – especially atheists (96%) – are the most likely to favor same-sex marriage legality. White, non-Hispanic evangelical Protestants are the least likely religious group to say they favor it (30%). Around two-thirds of U.S. Catholics (65%) favor same-sex marriage, as do 70% of White nonevangelical Protestants.
• In Brazil , Catholics (56%) are more likely than Protestants (32%) to support same-sex marriage.
• In Israel , Jewish adults (41%) are more likely than Muslims (8%) to support same-sex marriage. Among Israeli Jews, 4% of those who are Haredi (“ultra-Orthodox”) or Dati (“religious”) support legal same-sex marriage, compared with 29% of Masorti (“traditional”) Jews. Around three-quarters of Hiloni (“secular”) Jews support this policy.
• In Nigeria , Christians and Muslims are equally likely to oppose same-sex marriage (97% and 98%, respectively).

How attitudes about same-sex marriage have changed over time

It is difficult to directly compare these new survey findings with past surveys on whether people favor or oppose same-sex marriage. Earlier Center surveys focused more on religion and its influence in society, rather than political attitudes and international affairs. And in some places, the mode of the survey (e.g., face-to-face vs. phone vs. web) has changed over time.

However, a comparison with surveys conducted in Latin America in 2013-14 , in Europe in 2015-17 , and the long-term trend in the U.S. generally shows increased public support for the legalization of same-sex marriage over the past decade.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published June 13, 2023. Here are the questions used for the analysis , along with responses, and the survey methodology .

• International Affairs
• LGBTQ Acceptance
• LGBTQ Attitudes & Experiences
• Religion & LGBTQ Acceptance
• Same-Sex Marriage

Sneha Gubbala is a research assistant focusing on global attitudes research at Pew Research Center .

Jacob Poushter is an associate director focusing on global attitudes at Pew Research Center .

Christine Huang is a research associate focusing on global attitudes at Pew Research Center .

Support for legal abortion is widespread in many places, especially in Europe

Americans are less likely than others around the world to feel close to people in their country or community, growing partisan divisions over nato and ukraine, americans remain critical of china, as biden and trump seek reelection, who are the oldest – and youngest – current world leaders, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Same Sex Marriage Argumentative Essay, with Outline

Published by gudwriter on January 4, 2021 January 4, 2021

Example 1: Gay Marriages Argumentative Essay Outline

Introduction.

Same-sex marriage should be legal because it is a fundamental human right. To have experts write for you a quality paper on same sex marriage, seek help from a trusted academic writing service where you can buy research proposals online with ease and one you can be sure of getting the best possible assistance available

Elevate Your Writing with Our Free Writing Tools!

Did you know that we provide a free essay and speech generator, plagiarism checker, summarizer, paraphraser, and other writing tools for free?

Paragraph 1:

Same-sex marriage provides legal rights protection to same sex couples on such matters as taxes, finances, and health care.

• It gives them the right to become heirs to their spouses and enjoy tax breaks just like heterosexual married couples.
• It makes it possible for them to purchase properties together, open joint accounts, and sign documents together as couples.

Paragraph 2:

Same sex marriage allows two people in love to happily live together.

• Homosexuals deserve to be in love just like heterosexuals.
• The definition of marriage does not suggest that it should only be an exclusive union between two people of opposite sexes.

Perhaps you may be interested in learning about research proposals on human trafficking .

Paragraph 3:

Same sex marriage gives homosexual couples the right to start families.

• Gay and lesbian partners should be allowed to start families and have their own children.
• A family should ideally have parents and children.
• It is not necessary that the parents be a male and female.  

Paragraph 4:

Same sex marriage does not harm the institution of marriage and is potentially more stable.

• Legalization of civil unions or gay marriages does not  negatively impact abortion rates, divorce, or marriage.
• Heterosexual marriages have a slightly higher dissolution rate on average than opposite sex marriages.

Paragraph 5:

Opponents of same sex marriage may argue that it is important for children to have a father and mother for a balanced upbringing.

• They hold that homosexual couples only have one gender influence on children.
• They forget that that children under the parental care of same sex couples get to mingle with both male and female genders in various social places.

Paragraph 6:

Opponents may also argue that same-sex marriages reduce sanctity of marriage.

• To them, marriage is a religious and traditional commitment and ceremony.
• Unfortunately, such arguments treat marriage as a man-wife union only.
• They fail to recognize that there are people who do not ascribe to any tradition(s) or religions.
• Same sex marriage is a human right that should be enjoyed just like traditional heterosexual marriages.
• It protects the legal rights of lesbian and gay couples and allows them to actualize their love in matrimony.
• It enables them to exercise their right to start families and bring up children.
• It is only fair that all governments consider legalizing same sex marriages.

Read on the best motivational speech ideas .

Argumentative Essay on Same Sex Marriage

For many years now, same-sex marriage has been a controversial topic. While some countries have legalized the practice, others still consider it not right and treat it as illegal. Same-sex marriage is defined as a marriage or union between two people of the same sex, such as a man and a man. Some countries have broadened their perspective on this issue even though for many years, it has never been legally acknowledged, with some societies even considering it a taboo. The United Kingdom, Spain, France, Argentina, the Netherlands, and recently the United States are some of the countries that have legalized it (Winter, Forest & Senac, 2017). Irrespective of any arguments, same-sex marriage should be legal because it is a fundamental human right.

First, same-sex marriage, if recognized by society, provides legal rights protection to same sex couples on such matters as taxes, finances, and health care. If people live together in a homosexual relationship without being legally married, they do not enjoy the security to protect what they have worked for and saved together. In case one of them dies, the surviving partner would have no right over the property under the deceased’s name even if they both funded its acquisition (Winter, Forest & Senac, 2017). Legalizing same-sex unions would cushion homosexual partners from such unfortunate situations. They would have the right to become heirs to their spouses and enjoy tax breaks just like heterosexual married couples. Legalization would also make it possible for them to purchase properties together, open joint accounts, and sign documents together as couples.

Same sex marriage also allows two people in love to become one in a matrimonial union and live happily together. Denying homosexual couples the right to marry is thus denying them the right to be in love just like heterosexuals do. Moreover, the definition of marriage does not suggest that it should only be an exclusive union between two people of opposite sexes. According to Gerstmann (2017), marriage is a formally or legally recognized union between two people in a personal relationship. As per this definition, people should be allowed to marry once they are in love with each other irrespective of their genders. Reducing marriage to a union between a man and woman is thus a direct infringement into the rights of homosexuals.

Additionally, gay marriages give homosexual couples the right to start families. Just like heterosexual couples, gay and lesbian partners should be allowed to start families and have their own children. Essentially, a family should ideally have parents and children and it is not necessary that the parents be a male and female. Same sex partners can easily adopt and bring up children if their marriage is legalized and recognized by the society in which they live (Gerstmann, 2017). As one would concur, even some heterosexual couples are not able to sire their own children and resort to adopting one or even more. This is a right that should be extended to same sex couples too given that they may not be able to give birth on their own.

Further, same sex marriage does no harm whatsoever to the institution of marriage, and is potentially more stable. According to a 2009 study, legalization of civil unions or gay marriages does not in any way negatively impact abortion rates, divorce, or marriage (Langbein & Yost, 2009). This makes it quite uncalled for to argue against or prohibit gay marriages. In yet another study, only 1.1 percent of legally married gay couples end their relationships as compared to the 2 percent annual divorce rate among opposite-sex couples (Badgett & Herman, 2011). This implies that heterosexual marriages have a slightly higher dissolution rate on average than opposite sex marriages. It could then be argued that gay marriages are more stable than traditional man-woman marriages. The two types of marriages should thus be given equal chance because neither affects the other negatively. They also have more or less equal chances of succeeding if legally recognized and accepted.

Opponents of same sex marriage may argue that it is important for children to have a father and a mother. They may say that for children to have a good balance in their upbringing, they should be influenced by a father and a mother in their developmental years. Such arguments hold that homosexual couples only have one gender influence over the lives of children and that this is less fulfilling (Badgett, 2009). However, the arguments fail to recognize that children under the parental care of same sex couples get to mingle with both male and female genders in various social places. At school, the children get to be cared for and mentored by both male and female teachers who more or less serve almost the same role as parents.

Those who are opposed to same sex unions may also argue that such marriages reduce sanctity of marriage. To them, marriage is a religious and traditional commitment and ceremony that is held very sacred by people. They contend that there is need to do everything possible to preserve marriage because as an institution, it has been degrading slowly over time. Their concern is that traditional marriages are being devalued by same sex marriages which are swaying people away from being married and instead choosing to live with same sex partners (Nagle, 2010). It is clear here that such arguments treat marriage as a man-woman union only and are thus not cognizant of the true meaning of marriage. Moreover, they fail to recognize that traditions and religions should not be used against same sex couples because there are people who do not ascribe to any tradition(s) or religions.

Same sex marriage is a human right that should be enjoyed just like traditional heterosexual marriages. It protects the legal rights of lesbian and gay couples and allows them the well-deserved opportunity of actualizing their love in matrimony. In addition, it enables them to exercise their right to start families and bring up children. Arguments made against this form of marriage, such as that it undermines traditional marriages, are based on opinions and not facts. Moreover, it is not important for a child to have a father and a mother because there are other places in which they actively interact with people of different sexes. As such, it is only fair that all governments consider legalizing gay marriages.

Badgett, M. V., & Herman, J. L. (2011).  Patterns of relationship recognition by same-sex couples in the United States [PDF]. The Williams Institute. Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Marriage-Dissolution-FINAL.pdf .

Badgett, M. V. (2009). When gay people get married: what happens when societies legalize same-sex marriage . New York, NY: NYU Press.

Gerstmann, E. (2017). Same-sex marriage and the constitution . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Langbein, L., & Yost, M. A. (2009). Same-sex marriage and negative externalities.  Social Science Quarterly , 90(2), 292-308.

Nagle, J. (2010). Same-sex marriage: the debate . New York, NY: The Rosen Publishing Group.

Winter, B., Forest, M., & Senac, R. (2017). Global perspectives on same-sex marriage: a neo-institutional approach . New York, NY: Springer.

Explore a persuasive essay about strengthening community handled by our tutors following the prompt provided.

Example 2: Sample Essay Outline on Same Sex Marriages

Thesis:  Same sex marriage, just like opposite sex marriage, should be legal.

Pros of Same Sex Marriage

Same sex couples are better at parenting.

• Children brought up by same sex couples do better in terms of family cohesion and overall health.
• Children under the guardianship of lesbian mothers perform better academically and socially.

Same sex marriage reduces divorce rates.

• The divorce rates in a state were reduced significantly after the state legalized gay marriages. Higher divorce rates were recorded in states where gay marriages are prohibited.
• Divorce is not good for family cohesion.

Same sex marriage increases psychological wellbeing.

• Bisexuals, gays, and lesbians feel socially rejected if society views same-sex marriages as illegal or evil.
• After some states banned this kind of marriage, bisexuals, gays, and lesbians living there experienced increased anxiety disorders.

Cons of Same Sex Marriage

Same sex marriages may diminish heterosexual marriages.

• It could be possible for children in homosexual families to think that same sex unions are more fulfilling.
• They might want to become homosexuals upon growing up.

For a holistic development, a child should have both mother and father.

• Absence of a father or a mother in a family leaves a gaping hole in the life of a child.
• A child needs to learn how to relate with both male and female genders right from when they are born.

Other non-typical unions may be encouraged by same sex unions.

• People who get involved in such other acts as bestiality and incest may feel encouraged.
• They might start agitating for their “right” to get married to animals for instance.

Why Same Sex Marriage Should Be Legal

Paragraph 7:

Marriage is a fundamental human right.

• All individuals should enjoy marriage as a fundamental right.
• Denying one the right to marry a same sex partner is akin to denying them their basic right.

Paragraph 8:

Marriage is a concept based on love.

• It is inaccurate to confine marriage to be only between a man and woman.
• Marriage is a union between two people in love with each other, their gender or sexual orientation notwithstanding.

Paragraph 9:

opponents of same-sex marriage argue that a relationship between same-sex couples cannot be considered marriage since marriage is the union between a man and a woman.

• However, this definitional argument is both conclusory and circular.
• It is in no way logical to challenge gay marriage based on this archaic marriage definition.

Same sex marriage should be legalized by all countries in the world. In the U.S., the debate surrounding its legalization should die off because it is irrelevant. People have the right to marry whoever they like whether they are of the same sex.

Same Sex Marriage Essay Example

The idea of same sex marriage is one of the topics that have been widely debated in the United States of America. It has often been met with strong opposition since the majority of the country’s citizens are Christians and Christianity views the idea as evil. On the other hand, those who believe it is right and should be legalized have provided a number of arguments to support it, including that it is a fundamental human right. This debate is still ongoing even after a Supreme Court ruling legalized this type of marriage. However, this debate is unnecessary because same sex marriage, just like opposite sex marriage, should be legal.

It has been proven through studies that same sex couples are better at parenting. A University of Melbourne 2014 study indicated that compared to children raised by both mother and father, children brought up by same sex couples do better in terms of family cohesion and overall health. Similarly, the journal  Pediatrics  published a study in 2010 stating that children under the guardianship of lesbian mothers performed better academically and socially (Gerstmann, 2017). The children also experienced fewer social problems.

Same sex marriages also reduce divorce rates. According to Gerstmann (2017), the divorce rates in a state were reduced significantly after the state legalized gay marriages. This was as per the analysis of the before and after divorce statistics. Likewise, higher divorce rates were recorded in states where gay marriages are prohibited. Generally, divorce is not good for family cohesion especially in terms of caring for children. Children need to grow up under the care of both parents hence the need for their parents to stay together.

In addition, same sex marriage increases psychological wellbeing. This is because bisexuals, gays, and lesbians feel socially rejected if society views same-sex marriages as illegal or evil. A study report released in 2010 showed that after some states banned this kind of marriage, bisexuals, gays, and lesbians living there experienced a 248% rise in generalized anxiety disorders, a 42% increase in alcohol-use disorders, and a 37% rise in mood disorders (Winter, Forest & Senac, 2017). In this respect, allowing such marriages would make them feel normal and accepted by society.

Same sex marriages may diminish heterosexual marriages and the longstanding marriage culture in society. Perhaps, it could be possible for children in homosexual families to think that same sex unions are more fulfilling and enjoyable than opposite-sex relationships. As a result, they might want to become homosexuals upon growing up. This would mean that standardized marriages between opposite sexes face a bleak future (Nagle, 2010). Such a trend might threaten to throw the human race to extinction because there would be no procreation in future generations.

Same sex unions also fall short because for a holistic development, a child should have both a mother and a father. Absence of a father or a mother in a family leaves a gaping hole in the life of a child. The two major genders in the world are male and female and a child needs to learn how to relate with both of them right from when they are born (Nagle, 2010). A father teaches them how to live alongside males while a mother teaches them how to do the same with females.

Further, other non-typical unions may be encouraged by same sex unions. If the marriages are accepted worldwide, people who get involved in such other acts as bestiality and incest may feel encouraged (Winter, Forest & Senac, 2017). They might even start agitating for their “right” to get married to animals, for instance. This possibility would water down and deinstitutionalize the whole concept of consummation and marriage. This would further diminish the existence of heterosexual marriages as people would continue to find less and less importance in them.

Same sex unions should be legal because marriage is a fundamental human right. It has been stated by the United States Supreme Court fourteen times since 1888 that all individuals should enjoy marriage as a fundamental right (Hertz & Doskow, 2016). In making these judgments, the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that the Due Process Clause protects as one of the liberties the freedom to make personal choice in matters of marriage. The Court has maintained that this free choice is important as it allows free men to pursue happiness in an orderly manner. Thus, denying one the right to marry a same sex partner is akin to denying them their basic right.

People should also be legally allowed to get into same sex unions since marriage is a concept based on love. It is traditionally inaccurate to confine marriage to be only between a man and a woman. The working definition of marriage should be that it is a union between two people in love with each other, their gender or sexual orientation notwithstanding (Hertz & Doskow, 2016). Making it an exclusively man-woman affair trashes the essence of love in romantic relationships. If a man loves a fellow man, they should be allowed to marry just like a man and a woman in love may do.

As already alluded to, opponents of same-sex marriage argue that a relationship between same-sex couples cannot be considered marriage since marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Based on this traditional definition of marriage, they contend that gay and lesbian couples should not marry. However, as noted by Carpenter (2005), this definitional argument is both conclusory and circular and is thus seriously flawed and fallacious. It is in no way logical to challenge gay marriage based on this archaic marriage definition. That marriage only happens when one man and one woman come together in a matrimony is a constricted view of the institution of marriage. Moreover, there are no reasons accompanying the definition showing that it is the right one or should be the only one (Carpenter, 2005). Therefore, it should be expanded to include same-sex couples. The lack of reasons to support it makes it defenseless thus weak.

Same sex marriages should be legalized by all countries in the world. In the U.S., the debate surrounding its legalization should die off because it is irrelevant. People have the right to marry whoever they like whether they are of the same sex or not. Just like love can sprout between a man and a woman, so can it between a man and a fellow man or a woman and a fellow woman. There is absolutely no need to subject gays, lesbians, and bisexuals to unnecessary psychological torture by illegalizing same sex marriage.

Carpenter, D. (2005). Bad arguments against gay marriage.  Florida Coastal Law Review , VII , 181-220.

Gerstmann, E. (2017).  Same-sex marriage and the constitution . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Hertz, F., & Doskow, E. (2016).  Making it legal: a guide to same-sex marriage, domestic partnerships & civil unions . Berkeley, CA: Nolo.

Nagle, J. (2010).  Same-sex marriage: the debate . New York, NY: The Rosen Publishing Group.

Winter, B., Forest, M., & Senac, R. (2017).  Global perspectives on same-sex marriage: a neo-institutional approach . New York, NY: Springer.

Example 3: Same Sex Marriage Essay

Same Sex Marriage Essay- Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage. Discuss how the idea of gay marriage has changed over the last decade and show the progression of the movement.

Changing Attitudes on Same Sex Marriage Essay Outline

Introduction 

Thesis:  Gay marriage was regarded as an abomination in the early years, but in recent times the attitude of the society towards same-sex marriage is gradually changing.

In 1965, 70% of Americans were opposed to same-sex marriage.

• They cited its harmfulness to the American life.
• Prevalence of AIDS among gay people further increased this opposition.

Social gay movements contributed to change in the attitude of the society towards gay marriage.

• Gay movements increased the exposure of members of the society to gay marriage while showing their sufferings.
• Through social movements, the society saw the need for equality and fair treatment of gay persons.

Political movements in support of gay marriage have as well contributed to change in the attitude of the society towards gay marriage.

• Political bodies and politicians pushed for equality of gay people in efforts to garner political mileage.
• The influence of politicians changed the attitude of the society towards gay marriage.

The incidence of gay people, particularly in the United States has contributed to change in the attitude of the society towards gay marriage.

• Increase in the number of gay persons pushed people into accepting gay marriage.
• The media contributed in gathering compassion from members of the society by evidencing the sufferings of gay people.

The judiciary upheld the legitimacy of same-sex marriage.

• In 2014, 42 court rulings were made in favor of gay marriage.
• There are more than 30 states today with policies in support of same-sex marriage.

The increased push for the freedom of marriage contributed to changing the attitude on gay marriage.

• The Supreme Court ruling in 1987 that stopped governments from restricting the freedom of marriage worked in favor of same-sex marriage.

Paragraph 7: 

Supporters of same sex marriage have also increasingly argued that people should be allowed to marry not necessarily based on their gender but on the love between them.

• Restricting marriage to a union between heterosexual couples only creates a biased view of human sexuality.
• An adult should be allowed the freewill to seek for the fulfillment of love by starting a relationship with a partner of whichever gender of their choosing.

Gay marriage has been the subject of social, political and religious debates for many years but over the past two decades, the attitude of the society towards same-sex marriage has changed. Social gay movements and increased incidence of gay people has compelled the community to accept and tolerate gay marriages. The judiciary has as well contributed to this change in attitude by pushing the freedom and right to marriage.

Changing Attitudes on Same Sex Marriage Sample Essay

In the early years, gay marriage was an abomination and received criticism from many members of society. The principal reason as to why many people in society were objected to gay marriage was that it went against religious and societal values and teachings (Decoo, 2014). However, over the past three decades, the perception of society towards the practice has changed. The degree of its social tolerance and acceptance has gradually improved. In the 2000s, numerous social and political lobby groups pushed for a change in insolences towards gay marriage (Decoo, 2014). Though these lobby groups have tried to advocate for the rights of gay people, their principal focus was to change people’s attitudes towards homosexuality.

According to a study conducted in the year 1965 investigating the attitudes of Americans towards gay marriage, seventy percent of the respondents were opposed to the idea of same-sex marriage citing its harmfulness to the American life. Most Americans felt that the practice went against the social and moral values of the American society. In the years between 1975 and 1977, the number of Americans who were not objected to gay marriage increased (Decoo, 2014). However, this number decreased in the years of 1980, when the prevalence of AIDS among gay people hit alarming levels. In the years that followed, the attitudes of the American society towards gay marriage rapidly changed.

The rise of gay social movements has contributed significantly to a change in attitude of the society towards gay marriage. In the early years, people were not exposed to issues of same-sex marriage, but the gay social movements focused on increasing the exposure of gay marriage, while advocating for their equal treatment (Keleher & Smith, 2018). These movements were able to reveal the injustices and unfair treatment that gays were exposed to, and how such unfair treatment tarnishes the image of the society (Keleher & Smith, 2018). The movements persuaded the society to embark on ways of addressing injustices meted out on gay people. Through highlighting these injustices, members of the society acknowledged the need for reforms to bring about impartiality and non-discrimination in marriage.

Political movements in support of gay marriage have as well contributed to changing the attitude of the society towards the practice. As a matter of fact, one of the strategies that gay social movements employed in their advocacy for gay rights were political maneuvering (Demock, Doherty & Killey, 2013). The lobby groups approached aspiring politicians, who would advocate for equal rights of gays to garner political mileage. With time, politicians would use the subject to attack their competitors who were opposed to the idea of same sex marriage (Demock, Doherty & Killey, 2013). This increased political support for gay marriage influenced members of the society into changing their attitude towards the same.

The ever increasing number of gays, particularly in the United States, has contributed to a change in the attitude of the world society towards gay marriage. As the number of gays increased in the U.S., it became hard for members of the society to continue opposing this form of marriage (Demock, Doherty & Killey, 2013). Many families had at least one or more of their family members who would turn out to be gay. The perception of gay people by such families would therefore change upon learning that their loved ones were also gay (Demock, Doherty & Killey, 2013). The media also played a significant role in gathering compassion from the members of the society by portraying the injustices that gay people experienced (Demock, Doherty & Killey, 2013). The society would as a result be compelled to sympathize with gays and lesbians and thus change their stance on same-sex marriage.

Further, the judiciary has also contributed to the change in the attitude of the society towards gay marriage. There were states in the U.S. that initially illegalized same sex marriages, prompting gay people to file discrimination lawsuits (Coontz, 2014). Reports indicate that in the year 2014, there were more than 42 court rulings that ruled in favor of same-sex couples (Coontz, 2014). Some critics of same-sex marriage termed these rulings as judicial activism. They argued that the judiciary was frustrating the will of the American society, which was opposed to same-sex marriage (Coontz, 2014). Following these rulings and the increased advocacy for equality and fair treatment of gay people, some states implemented policies is support of same-sex marriage (Coontz, 2014). Today, the entire United States treats the practice as legal, as was determined by the Supreme Court back in 2015.

The increased push for the freedom of marriage has also contributed to changing the attitude on gay marriage. In the early years, there were states, especially in the United States, that opposed interracial marriages, so that a white could not marry an African-American, for instance (Coontz, 2014). In the years before 1967, there were states that restricted people with tuberculosis or prisoners from getting married. Other states also discouraged employers from hiring married women. However, in 1987 the Supreme Court ruled that state governments had no right to deny people of their freedom of marriage (Coontz, 2014). When such laws were regarded as violations of human rights, gay people also termed the restriction of same-sex marriage as a violation of their liberty and freedom to marry.

Supporters of same sex marriage have also increasingly argued that people should be allowed to marry not necessarily based on their gender but on the love between them and their decision as two adults. According to such people, restricting marriage to a union between heterosexual couples only creates a biased view of human sexuality. For example, they point out that this extreme view fails to acknowledge that gay couples also derive fulfilment from their romantic relationships (Steorts, 2015). They additionally contend that an adult should be allowed the freewill to seek for this fulfillment by starting a relationship with a partner of whichever gender of their choosing. Whether they love a man or a woman should not be anybody’s concern. The argument also notes that gay couples who have come out clearly demonstrate that they are happy in their relationships.

Gay marriage has been the subject of social, political, and religious debates for many years but over the past two decades, the attitude of the society towards it has significantly changed. Social gay movements and increased numbers of gay people has compelled the community to accept and tolerate the practice. The judiciary has as well contributed to this change in attitude by pushing the freedom and right to marriage, thereby finally making the practice legal in the United States.

Coontz, S. (2014). “Why America changed its mind on gay marriageable”.  CNN . Retrieved June 23, 2020 from  http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/13/opinion/coontz-same-sex-marriage/index.html

Decoo, E. (2014).  Changing attitudes toward homosexuality in the United States from 1977 to 2012 . Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.

Demock, M., Doherty, C., & Kiley, J. (2013). Growing support for gay marriage: changed minds and changing demographics.  Gen ,  10 , 1965-1980.

Keleher, A. G., & Smith, E. (2008). Explaining the growing support for gay and lesbian equality since 1990. In  Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA .

Steorts, J. L. (2015). “An equal chance at love: why we should recognize same-sex marriage”.  National Review . Retrieved June 23, 2020 from  https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/05/yes-same-sex-marriage-about-equality-courts-should-not-decide/

Our article explores the intricacies of same-sex marriage discourse, offering a debated essay with a structured outline. Explore our speech writer generator free tool and create a good speech.

More examples of Argumentative Essays written by our team of professional writers

• American Patriotism Argumentative Essay
• Argumentative Essay On Marijuana Legalization
• Euthanasia Argumentative Essay Sample
• Argumentative Essay on Abortion – Sample Essay
• Gun Control Argumentative Essay – Sample Essay
• Can Money Buy Happiness Argumentative Essay
• Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay
• Illegal Immigration Argumentative Essay

If you are having any issues choosing a suitable topic for your argumentative essay, worry no more for we have a variety of argumentative topics  to choose from and convince others of your position. Y ou can also get college homework help from Gudwriter and receive a plagiarism free paper written from scratch.

Special offer! Get 20% discount on your first order. Promo code: SAVE20

Related Posts

Free essays and research papers, artificial intelligence argumentative essay – with outline.

Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay Outline In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become one of the rapidly developing fields and as its capabilities continue to expand, its potential impact on society has become a topic Read more…

Synthesis Essay Example – With Outline

The goal of a synthesis paper is to show that you can handle in-depth research, dissect complex ideas, and present the arguments. Most college or university students have a hard time writing a synthesis essay, Read more…

Examples of Spatial Order – With Outline

A spatial order is an organizational style that helps in the presentation of ideas or things as is in their locations. Most students struggle to understand the meaning of spatial order in writing and have Read more…

How has same-sex marriage changed America?

More acceptance, but new fears and fights

• Newsletter sign up Newsletter

This week marks a notable anniversary: 20 years since America's first legal same-sex marriages were performed in Massachusetts. The ceremonies, featuring seven couples, came after the state's top court ruled that the Massachusetts Constitution "forbids the creation of second-class citizens." "That ruling, and the marriages it allowed, represented progress few queer people expected to witness in our lifetimes," Renée Graham said in The Boston Globe .

"Two decades later, what was once the white-hot center of political debate has receded to the background," said The Wall Street Journal . The Massachusetts ruling didn't mark the end of that debate, but it was the beginning of the end. The U.S. Supreme Court settled the issue with its landmark 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that legalized same-sex marriages nationwide. What was once a bitterly divisive issue is now relatively popular: "Polls show nearly three-quarters of Americans, including 49% of Republicans and a majority of regular churchgoers, support it." Does that mean the debate is completely over?

What did the commentators say?

"The past few years have taught us that hard-earned rights should not be taken for granted," Robert B. Hanson, the judge who ruled in favor of gay marriage in Iowa in 2007, said in The Des Moines Register . Same-sex families have blossomed even in red states — Iowa is home to 4,000 such couples, and more than a quarter of those are raising children. But the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022 signaled that other rights could be on the chopping block. "There are real threats to this progress, and it's critical that we not lose sight of them."

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

This means same-sex marriage — far from firmly entrenched in the law — might be on the ballot in 2024. Right now a "majority of justices aren't ready to rule that same-sex marriage is no longer protected," Philip Elliott said at Time magazine. That could change depending on the results of the presidential election. The next president could replace enough Supreme Court justices to "shift that dynamic fairly quickly." Strategists in both parties are trying to avoid discussing LGBTQ+ rights, preferring to focus instead on abortion. That should change. The issue deserves "better attention by the candidates and voters."

Onetime opponents of same-sex marriage have largely moved on to campaigns against transgender rights, The New York Times said in 2023. After the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell, "social conservatives were set adrift." The new focus on transgender Americans, particularly young people, has "reinvigorated a network of conservative groups, increased fund-raising and set the agenda in school boards and state legislatures."

Perhaps that's because conservative fears about the legalization of same-sex marriage "simply have not come to pass," UCLA's Benjamin R. Karney told Newsweek . There were concerns that allowing gay marriage would result in "fewer couples marrying, more couples divorcing and an overall retreat from family formation," he said. Instead, marriage rates went up among both different-sex and same-sex couples, while adoption rates increased. "The only changes we detect," said Melanie A. Zaber, an economist who studied the issue with Karney, "are suggestive of a renewed salience of marriage among the broader public."

Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox

A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com

Joel Mathis is a freelance writer who has spent nine years as a syndicated columnist, co-writing the RedBlueAmerica column as the liberal half of a point-counterpoint duo. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic, The Kansas City Star and Heatmap News. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association. 

The Week's daily hard sudoku puzzle

By The Week Staff Published 23 May 24

The Week's daily medium sudoku puzzle

The Week's daily codeword puzzle

Today's Big Question How the International Criminal Court's push to arrest the men deemed responsible for the war in Gaza could play out

By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published 22 May 24

Today's big question Prime minister expected to announce snap summer election

By Hollie Clemence, The Week UK Published 22 May 24

Today's Big Question Voters haven't started paying attention to the presidential race, he says

By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published 21 May 24

Today's Big Question Climate change goals and American jobs in tension

By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published 20 May 24

Speed Read The court rejected a conservative-backed challenge to the way the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is funded

By Peter Weber, The Week US Published 17 May 24

Today's Big Question Catalyst for the disorder is new legislation that would expand the eligible electorate, but Baku is accused of fomenting turmoil

By Rebecca Messina, The Week UK Published 17 May 24

Today's Big Question International criticism and a lack of progress in freeing hostages is piling pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu

By Richard Windsor, The Week UK Published 16 May 24

Today's Big Question As college students across the country speak out against the Gaza war, some employers are already threatening post-graduation consequences

By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published 15 May 24

• Contact Future's experts
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Advertise With Us

The Week is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site . © Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036.

Gay marriage’s effects are ‘unambiguously positive,’ study finds

I t’s been 20 years since gay marriage was first legalized in the US. Back in May of 2004, Massachusetts became the first state to offer marriage licenses to same-sex couples, though not without major pushback. Conservatives complained that legalizing gay marriage would ruin the sanctity of straight marriage, or that fewer people would want to get married in general. Now, a new study proves that the exact opposite has come true.

The study , published by nonprofit research organization RAND, reviewed existing studies and conducted new analyses to see the state of marriage in America today. Long story short, the study’s authors concluded that “the benefits of access to legal marriage for same-sex couples are unambiguously positive.”

What exactly are those benefits? In states where gay marriage was legalized, the rates of anti-queer hate crimes, employment discrimination, and STDs including syphilis, HIV, and AIDS all declined. Meanwhile, rates of homeownership, earnings, and relationship stability all increased for same-sex households in those states, as did adoption rates.

And as far as overall attitudes toward marriage, legalizing gay marriage doesn’t seem to have had much of an impact — and if it did, it was positive. Marriage rates have increased by 1-2% for different-sex couples and by 10% overall. Around 70% of Americans now support same-sex marriage.

“Some of those who opposed the granting of marriage rights to same-sex couples predicted that doing so would undermine the institution of marriage, resulting in fewer couples marrying, more couples divorcing and an overall retreat from family formation,” Benjamin R. Karney, one of the study’s authors, said in a statement . “Overall, the fears of opponents of same-sex marriage simply have not come to pass.”

“We find no evidence for a retreat from marriage,” added Melanie A. Zaber, another of the study’s authors. “In fact, there is evidence suggesting that by extending marriage rights to a greater number of couples, interest in marriage increased. And that finding isn’t limited to same-sex couples — this is also true for the broader population.”

“The only changes we detect are suggestive of a renewed salience of marriage among the broader public,” Zaber continued. “There is no empirical basis for concerns that allowing same-sex couples to marry has negatively affected different-sex couples and families.”