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
Workplace Integrity Investigator (2 Positions Available)
Lecturer / Senior Lecturer in Indigenous Knowledges
Commissioning Editor Nigeria
Professor in Physiotherapy
Postdoctoral Research Associate
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:
An Argument Against Same-Sex Marriage: An Interview with Rick Santorum
The debate over same-sex marriage in the United States is a contentious one, and advocates on both sides continue to work hard to make their voices heard. To explore the case against gay marriage, the Pew Forum has turned to Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and now a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Sen. Santorum is also the author of the 2005 book It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good , in which he makes the case for promoting families anchored by a married mother and father.
A counterargument explaining the case for same-sex marriage is made by Jonathan Rauch, a senior writer at The National Journal .
Featuring: Rick Santorum , Senior Fellow, Ethics and Public Policy Center; Former U.S. Senator
Interviewer: David Masci , Senior Research Fellow, Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life
In this Q&A: Why oppose gay marriage?
The “go-slow” approach
Child welfare
Christian values
Question & Answer
Gay rights advocates and others say that gay and lesbian people want to get married for the same reasons that straight people do – they want to be in caring, stable relationships, they want to build a life and even start a family with someone else. Why shouldn’t they be able to do this?
See, I think that’s the foundational flaw with this whole debate. The law is as it has been for 200-plus years, and so the burden is on them to make the persuasive case as to why they should be married, not just for their benefit but for what the impact is on society and marriage as a whole, and on children.
I would argue that the gay community has not made the argument. They may have made the argument as to why they want it, but they have not made any arguments as to why this is beneficial for society. They have not made any argument – convincing or otherwise, that I’m aware of – as to what the impact would be on heterosexual marriages and what the impact would be on children.
They have no studies. They have no information whatsoever about what it would do to the moral ecology of the country, what it would do to religious liberty, what it would do to the mental and physical health of children – nothing. They’ve made no case. Basically the case they’ve made is, “We want what you want, and therefore you should give it to us.”
So you’re saying that advocates of same-sex marriage are not seeing the big picture?
Yes. I have a book that was written a few years ago called It Takes a Family . In that book I have a chapter on moral ecology, and I explain that if you go to the National Archives, you will come to a section that has, as far as the eye can see, rows and rows and rows of environmental impact statements, because we have laws in this country that say before you go out and you put in a bridge across a creek, you have to go out and see whether what you’re doing is disturbing the landscape there.
Yet when it comes to something that I happen to believe is actually more important than a particular plot of land – the entire moral ecology of our country, who we are as a people, what we stand for, what we teach our children, what our values and ethics are – people argue that we can build the equivalent of a strip mall without even thinking about what those consequences are.
Some people in favor of gay marriage have argued for a “go-slow” approach, acknowledging that we’re in largely unknown territory and that a majority of Americans are not yet comfortable with same-sex marriage. Does that attitude allay any of your fears?
No. They want the convenient accelerator of the courts to put this in play, and then they want the judicious temperament of the American democratic system to govern it. I don’t think you can have your cake and eat it too. Same-sex marriage advocates are not going to state legislatures, except in some cases for civil unions. They are using the courts.
If the courts are going to be your accelerator, then get ready for a ride. And if the courts ultimately say, “Marriage must be allowed between anybody and anybody,” the gay rights advocates are not going to say, “Well, you’ve gone too far.” No, I think the go-slow argument is there to make us feel better, but it doesn’t hold water.
Another argument made by gay rights advocates is that with or without marriage, gay families are already a widespread reality. They point out that we already have gay couples living together, some with children. And they ask: Isn’t it better that they be legally married to each other, if for no other reason than for the benefit and the welfare of the children?
The answer is no – because of the consequences to society as a whole. And again, those are consequences that they choose to ignore. What society should be about is encouraging what’s best for children. What’s best for children, we know, is a mother and a father who are the parents of that child, raising that child in a stable, married relationship, and we should have laws that encourage that, that support that.
What you’re talking about with same-sex marriage is completely deconstructing marriage and taking away a privilege that is given to two people, a man and a woman who are married, who have a child or adopt a child. We know it’s best for children and for society that men and women get married. We know it’s healthier. We know it’s better for men. We know it’s better for women. We know it’s better for communities.
What we don’t know is what happens with other options. And once you get away from the model of “what we know is best” and you get into the other options, from my perspective, there’s no stopping it. And also from my perspective, you devalue what you want to value, which is a man and woman in marriage with a child or children. And when you devalue that, you get less of it. When you get less of it, society as a whole suffers.
Do you feel confident that if same-sex marriage became the norm in our society that we would get less traditional marriage?
The answer is yes, because marriage then becomes, to some degree, meaningless. I mean, if anybody can get married for any reason, then it loses its special place. And, you know, it’s already lost its special place, in many respects, because of divorce. The institution of marriage is already under assault. So why should we do more to discredit it and harm it?
Stanley Kurtz of the Ethics and Public Policy Center has written extensively about this, about what the impact is in countries that have adopted same-sex marriage. We have, in fact, seen a decline in the number of marriages, a delay in people getting married, more children being born out of wedlock and higher rates of divorce. None of those things are good for society. None of those things are good for children.
But can you lay these changes at the feet of same-sex marriage?
Yes, I think you can lay them at its feet. Kurtz notes that the marriage rate in the Netherlands was always actually one of the lowest in the EU. And once same-sex marriage was put in place, it broke below the line.
As a person who has positioned himself as a defender of Christian values, why is gay marriage particularly opposed to those values?
Well, the laws in this country are built upon a certain worldview, and it is the Judeo-Christian worldview. And that worldview has been expressed in our laws on marriage for 200-plus years. Up until 25 years ago, we would never have sat here and done this interview. It would have been beyond the pale. And so it is clearly a dramatic departure from the Judeo-Christian ethic that is reflected in our laws that say marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.
When you look ahead, do you feel optimistic that your side in this debate will ultimately prevail?
What I’ve noticed about this debate is that fewer and fewer people are stepping up and taking the position I’m taking because they see the consequences of doing so. I don’t think there is an issue that is a tougher issue for people to stand up against in American culture today than this one, both from the standpoint of the mainstream media and the popular culture condemning you for your – they can use all sorts of words to describe you – intolerant, bigot, homophobe, hater. The other side takes it personally. And so it makes it very difficult for folks to stand up and argue public policy when the other side views it as a personal, direct assault on them. So it’s very, very hard for me to be optimistic when we have a battle of ideas and one side is universally hammered for being intolerant bigots and the other side is enlightened and tolerant – which I think is false, but it is the pervasive attitude.
We know that the American public doesn’t approve of same-sex marriage, but they are uncomfortable about it because, again, the public perception is if you feel that way, you’re a bigot or a hater. And if the culture continues to send that message, if our educational system sends that message, which it does, you know, eventually the culture will change and people’s opinions will change.
The push back is what most people know: that mothers and fathers bring something unique. I mean, I have six children. I know that two mothers would not be able to give to my children what a mother and a father can give to my children. For instance, my daughter’s relationship with men is, in many respects, formed by her relationship with me. There are volumes of evidence showing that if little girls don’t have a father, it impacts their ability as adults to bond with men in healthy relationships.
What do we know, really, about children raised by same-sex couples? We’re into, in many respects, an unknown territory. There is already a difficult environment for children in America today, at least from the traditional Judeo-Christian perspective. So I think this is a fight worth fighting, even if it’s not a popular fight.
This transcript has been edited for clarity, spelling and grammar.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings
Sign up for The Briefing
Weekly updates on the world of news & information
- Religion & Social Values
- Same-Sex Marriage
Many Catholics in the U.S. and Latin America Want the Church to Allow Birth Control and to Let Women Become Priests
Support for legal abortion is widespread in many places, especially in europe, public opinion on abortion, 8 in 10 americans say religion is losing influence in public life, how people around the world view same-sex marriage, most popular.
901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 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, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.
© 2024 Pew Research Center
Why should Gay Marriage be Legal?
How it works
Most people, like upstanding citizens who pay their taxes and abide by the laws, believe that they deserve the same rights granted to any other citizens by the government. Views on these individuals tend to change if they are gay or lesbian. Homosexual couples are often the main targets of this conflict, with people arguing they should not be allowed to marry. The argument is that legalizing gay marriage could open the door to all kinds of unusual behaviors under the guise of allowing homosexual couples to marry.
However, the US Supreme Court has established and upheld laws to protect same-sex couples. By 2015, all fifty states allowed this type of marriage, recognizing that gay and lesbian people pay taxes to the government just like any other citizen (Harvard). If the government can enforce the right to pay taxes and judge everyone equally, then homosexual couples should have the right to marry too. The lack of legal recognition for homosexual couples affects them in numerous ways.
The struggle is more complicated than simply arguing whether or not they should be allowed to marry because they live together. If the government enforces the same laws on homosexual people as it does on heterosexual people, such as paying taxes that contribute to the community, why should same-sex couples face discrimination instead of being granted the same rights?
This argument mirrors the one presented in the Baker V. Vermont court case. “Gay and lesbian couples had argued that they were denied the protection of more than 300 laws as a result of not being allowed to marry” (Robinson 232). This shows that in legal terms, it is clear that homosexuals are not treated equally under the law. Over time, gay and lesbian same-sex civil marriages have demonstrated that the concept of “marriage,” and the rights that all citizens deserve, regardless of their gender or sexual orientation, can and should be respected unanimously.
A possible concern arises from those arguing from a religious standpoint, who claim same-sex marriages violate their fundamental biblical tenets. They argue no culture has endorsed the idea of men marrying men or women marrying women. This concern is understandable but the separation of church and state is a fundamental principle that must be observed.
While most religions see homosexuality as a sin, that does not mean states are incapable of legalizing gay marriage. The role of the state and the government is not to impose religious ideas or beliefs, but to support the constitutional and inalienable rights of all citizens. The decision to marry should be the individual’s own, based on what they want or on their preferences. No one, including the government, should be able or think they are capable of intruding on and controlling the personal lives of citizens to the extent of denying them the civil right to marry due to their sexual orientation.
The decision should not be coming from religious leaders, government or some other type of person or maybe organization who would think or decide something based on what is beneficial for them, not taking in account the feelings or rights that this individual has. The number of same-sex couples has increased tremendously; marriage is about love and supporting one another, and if people feel comfortable and do not have any problem with being with someone who is of the same sex as them, then why should their freedoms be limited?
Perhaps, states should allow the civil union between same-sex couples and grant them with all of the same rights as heterosexual couples. Nowadays, we live in a world full of people with many different cultures, lifestyles, customs, and beliefs. We have overcome many challenging obstacles in the past that had to deal with discrimination, and we also had created a system of rules that were given to the people in order to protect their individual rights and also them as a persona.
Banning same-sex marriage is a contradiction to the First Amendment which clearly states that every single person in the United States has freedom of speech, expression, and religion, so it it’s important for people as a society to recognize that worrying too much about gay and lesbian couples has nothing to do with them. Homosexuals are human beings too, and they should be treated like one, with respect, just like any other male and female couple and everybody, gay or not, should be treated equally.
Cite this page
Why Should Gay Marriage Be Legal?. (2019, May 27). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/why-should-gay-marriage-be-legal/
"Why Should Gay Marriage Be Legal?." PapersOwl.com , 27 May 2019, https://papersowl.com/examples/why-should-gay-marriage-be-legal/
PapersOwl.com. (2019). Why Should Gay Marriage Be Legal? . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/why-should-gay-marriage-be-legal/ [Accessed: 18 Nov. 2024]
"Why Should Gay Marriage Be Legal?." PapersOwl.com, May 27, 2019. Accessed November 18, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/why-should-gay-marriage-be-legal/
"Why Should Gay Marriage Be Legal?," PapersOwl.com , 27-May-2019. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/why-should-gay-marriage-be-legal/. [Accessed: 18-Nov-2024]
PapersOwl.com. (2019). Why Should Gay Marriage Be Legal? . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/why-should-gay-marriage-be-legal/ [Accessed: 18-Nov-2024]
Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade
Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.
Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!
Please check your inbox.
You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.
Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide
1. Tell Us Your Requirements
2. Pick your perfect writer
3. Get Your Paper and Pay
Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!
Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.
short deadlines
100% Plagiarism-Free
Certified writers
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Pro 3. Legal marriage is a secular institution that should not be limited by religious objections to same-sex marriage. Religious institutions can decline to marry gay and lesbian couples if they wish, but they should not dictate marriage laws for society at large.
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 ...
Every individual must support the cause of equality. Same-sex marriages must be legalized in all parts of the world, and same-sex couples must be given equal human rights. Same-sex marriages must be welcomed with joy, and same-sex couples must not be subjected to discrimination. Marrying anyone is a basic fundamental right, thus not allowing ...
Gay Marriage and the LawThe constitutional dimensions of the same-sex marriage debate.: A Stable MajorityAmericans continue to oppose gay marriage, but most support civil unions.: Map: State Policies on Same-Sex MarriageMaps showing state laws on gay marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships.: Religious Groups' Official Positions on Gay MarriageA breakdown of 17 major religious groups ...
The debate over same-sex marriage in the United States is a contentious one, and advocates on both sides continue to work hard to make their voices heard. To explore the case for gay marriage, the Pew Forum has turned to Jonathan Rauch, a columnist at The National Journal and guest scholar at The Brookings Institution.
The fourth reason why the gay marriage should be legal is because it does not infer polygamy. Gay marriage makes sense because it meets an essential need for the individuals involved and it also benefits society. Poligamy, by contrast, does neither. Some people affirm that if they take the step of allowing gay marriages they will slide down a ...
Gay marriage should be legal because as woman and man, all individuals have the same right in society; because same-sex couples can constitute a good based family; because it is just a way to make official a common union nowadays, even with the religious issue; because it is not related to polygamy; and because love matters and it does not ...
The debate over same-sex marriage in the United States is a contentious one, and advocates on both sides continue to work hard to make their voices heard. To explore the case against gay marriage, the Pew Forum has turned to Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and now a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMe1505179. Eleven years ago, Massachusetts became the first state in the country to give same-sex marriages full legal recognition. Today, same-sex marriage is legal, through ...
This shows that in legal terms, it is clear that homosexuals are not treated equally under the law. Over time, gay and lesbian same-sex civil marriages have demonstrated that the concept of "marriage," and the rights that all citizens deserve, regardless of their gender or sexual orientation, can and should be respected unanimously.