Interracial Marriage: History and Future Developments

America, the vast scenario of racial diversity and multicultural society, is a country that enjoys diverse cultures, rituals and beliefs. The history of America begins from the geographical expeditions undertook by adventurous sailors from Europe. From the beginning itself, America was an amalgam of unity in diversity. But before colonization by Europe, there lived natives, and gradually they got marginalized from the mainstream of society. The slaves who were brought in from African continent comprise a major part of population. So there was high chance for interracial marriages between these different racial groups. Basically interracial marriage, in the context of America, is considered as the marriage between black and white. In the first part of this work, the development, maintenance and future of race relations in the United States is closely examined. Then the relation between interracial marriage and racial relations and their forms are discussed. The third part discusses the problems faced by this group with reference to economics and housing. The last part of the work deals with the expected future developments in interracial marriages. Moreover, the whole work develops on a historical and contemporary context of interracial marriage in the United States.

The development of interracial marriages in the United States lies deep in the interracial relations among different races. Earlier, interracial relations and interracial marriages were not common. There were restrictions imposed by South Caucasian Americans on African Americans. This restriction hindered the interracial marriages and mingling of various races in the United States. In America, the racial segregation and exploitation due to racial issued came to an end by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Jay A. Sigler in- Civil rights in America: 1500 to the present is of the opinion that the civil rights of the citizens of America is helpful to make and end to the racial segregation in America. Politics of civil rights: ending racial segregation in America. (Jay, 1998).

From another view point, the increased rate of interracial marriage will help in reducing or ending racial segregation. Moreover, the civil rights are not against the interracial marriage and relation. These laws resulted in a steady increase in interracial marriage in the United States on America. The Caucasian Americans are the people who oppose inter racial marriages. But there is a slow but gradual increase in the occurrence of interracial marriages among these people. Mary E. Williams, in Interracial America: opposing viewpoints makes clear that the racial and ethnic differences are against American Culture. Through interracial marriages, this problem can be resolved. Racial and ethnic differences endanger American culture. (Williams, 2001).

Thus, interracial marriages can be understood as helping to enrich American Culture. Due to the changed circumstances, marriage between Caucasian Americans and Asian Americans are becoming increasingly common for both genders. Among African Americans there is a high tendency of interracial marriage. This tendency is behind the low rate of same race marriage between African American male and African American female. Interracial marriage between Native Americans and Asians also show an increase in rate. Another group who are behind the high rate of interracial marriage is the Filipinos in America. The Filipino Americans show the tendency of interracial marriage and they have relation with Native Americans and Alaskan Native people. Centuries ago, Filipinos were under the rule of Spain. There existed Pilipino trade, i.e., human trade, between Philippines and America. The Filipinos who happened to reach the American continent as laborers to the plantations settled in Mexico and Louisiana and they began to marry Native American women. The Filipinos who settled in Alaska began to marry Native Alaskan women. But the Chinese men who settled in America faced a different problem that the number of Chinese females was far too less than that of males, which forces them to marry native American females. But when one go through the marriage among Native Americans and Caucasian Americans it can be seen that the rate is so low. American women in USA. So they were forced to marry African American women. But the rate of marriage relation between Native Americans and African Americans is relatively higher. There exists a large number of population of mixed African Amerindians in USA. This tendency of mixed marriage shows a gradual increase in rate from 18th century, which became strong in the early decades of the 20th century. Because of the increase in interracial marriages among the African American men, they faced the problem of marriage squeeze and they were forced to marry-African American women. It can be seen that interracial marriage made the American society more diverse than ever. Moreover, interracial marriage among different racial groups in America developed through ages and it played an important role in peaceful co operation among diverse cultures. Samuel Walker, Cassia Spohn, and Miriam DeLone in  The color of justice : race, ethnicity, and crime in America points out that some crimes that the reason behind some crimes that are committed in America is interracial hatred. Crime as an interracial (hate) event. (Walker, Spohn & Delone, 2007).

Involvement of crime in interracial relation and to an extent, interracial marriages is a serious situation. In a multicultural society like America, the problem is more serious because there is close relation among different races. But interracial marriages resulted in some social and cultural problems. The most important one is the problems faced by the off springs of mixed married couples. The next generation with mixed ancestry may face serious problems because they are in a dilemma as to which culture they had to accept, fathers or mothers? But it is evident that interracial marriages resulted in social change and the problems related to these are yet to be solved.

The experiences of black/white interracial couples are helpful to have a clear understanding on the issue of racial relations and attitudes of the society on racial relations. Earlier, the interracial marriages were banned and there were strict guidelines on marriages in the United States of America. But now, the democratic outlook and the freedom spirit of the people helped to resolve the problems and interracial marriages are common. Bruce Katz and Robert E. Lang in-Redefining urban and suburban America: evidence from Census 2000points out that Racial and ethnic change in the nations largest cities. (Katz & Lang, 2006). changed the social relation among various races in America. The change in the mind set of urban cities can be considered as a yardstick to measure social change. It is evident that there is a racial and ethnic change in large cities of the US. Most of the people of America are the off springs of the immigrants from Europe and other parts of the world. The diversity in nationality resulted in diverse culture. When one consider the natives of the American continent, the American Indians and other ethnic races come to the limelight. This native race of American continent was not against interracial marriages and interracial relations. Their relation with the people who immigrated to the mainland changed their outlook on culture and human relations. They accepted the immigrants as the part of their society. Earlier, there was rivalry and blood shed but through ages these people were forced to accept the immigrants and they were ready to accept the inevitable evil. The interracial relations among the various races in America helped in improving racial relations and it resulted in racial progress. But it does not show that the problem of racism and racial discrimination is diminishing and had vanished from the society. But it initiated positive change in relations. Kenneth Bolton, Jr. and Joe R. Feagin in their work Black in blue : African-American police officers and racism makes clear that the black police officers who are working in American Police forces face problems within their community and in the society. As they try to make policing fairer for residents of Black communities, their fellow White officers often view them as radicals, while some members of Black communities perceive them to be traitors. (Bolton & Feagin, 2004).

When they try to help the people within their community, the white officers consider them as radical. On the other part, some black members consider them as traitors who help the white community. But, this acceptance of blacks by whites is a part of social change. Another phenomenon that can be seen among interracial couples is the opposition from their family, community and society makes the relation more strong. These couples can embody the best and worst of the racial relations. When they are able to love beyond the rigid laws and restrictions imposed by the society, they embody the best of the relation. When these relations solidify the racial segregation through opposition of black and white families, they embody the worst of racial relations.

There are so many problems regarding to economics and housing in US. Some of these problems have close connection with the problems of interracial marriages. There is high chance for an interracial couple and their children to face problems in the workplace, in housing, with friends and with family. There is no evidence of status exchange in interracial marriage to whites. But there exist an exchange of income among the marriage of Asian husband- white wife. When one consider the equal status exchange in interracial marriages, it can be seen that certain racial groups in the U.S. like Native Americans, Native Hawaiians and Hispanics show this characteristics. In the US, Asian Americans engage in more interracial relations. The Asian American family is ready to accept interracial relations. They now that interracial marriage is common in a multicultural society and they are ready to accept it as the part of diversity. Another positive side of interracial marriage is that it helped to move the society to progress. Moreover, it helped the blacks in America to grab new opportunities and to attain new heights in the society. For the first time, interracial marriages helped to minimize the differences and problems among the races in US. When interracial marriages take place, the difference in culture, rituals, and even language is out of focus. Some people consider marriage as a private contract between two persons but it possesses a wider meaning. It is also a social contract. The most controversial interracial marriage in US is the marriage between white and black. As earlier pointed out, marriage is a social agreement, but interracial couples face extra difficulties to keep their marriage viable. The problem is that there is no supportive social environment for interracial couples. There are so many problems faced by interracial couples and their children in the work place, in housing, with friends, and with family. The interracial marriage is a rebellion against family so the couple will have to live outside their families. Most of the people who are engaged in interracial marriage face the problem of proper housing because the family may be against their decision. When they are in close relation, there is less chance to think about future problems like housing and economic matters. If one of the partners is with proper housing facilities and with sound economic background, there will be fewer problems related to these matters. The motive behind some interracial marriages is socialization and friendship. Whatever the motive, the real force that binds together two persons is attraction which may be physical or intellectual. When one thinks about the rate of divorce among the interracial married couples, it can be seen that it is lower than the rate the same race marriages. The large number of divorces in the US is of same race marriage. So there is no evidence that interracial marriage is an utter failure. When one considers the success of a marriage whether it is interracial or same racial, the success depends upon the ability of the couples to the problems they face in day to day life. Other than the problems created by the society, interracial marriages are similar to same race marriages. It can be seen that, interracial marriages display the courage and optimism in spite of the obstacles the faced.

The trends that are discussed are able to predict that the future of interracial marriages will not be so bad because the racial there is change in attitude towards the interracially married couples. Earlier, interracial marriages were considered as crime and it was a punishable offence. But the change in social outlook helped to overcome this problem. Since 1980 in USA, the number of interracial couples has more than doubled. This increased rate of marriage was sufficient to change the mind of the society. The diversity in population due to the interracial marriage and immigration makes the American society more and more diverse. Most of the people in US are ready to accept interracial marriages. Moreover, studies related to attitude towards interracial marriages prove that American attitudes towards interracial marriage also improved. Now most of the people of America do not consider interracial marriage as a strange thing. The future development can be predicted by studying the activities and attitudes of teenagers towards interracial marriages. The black parents in America are against interracial dating tendency of their children. But the fact is that interracial dating among blacks in America is increasing than ever. Joe Feagin and Eileen OBrien in White men on race : power, privilege, and the shaping of cultural consciousness points out that Issues of interracial dating and marriage. (Feagin & OBrien, 2003). are closely related to the increased rate of interracial marriages in America. When the rate of interracial marriages began to increase, the issues related to this interracial relation also increased. But, it resulted in an open minded discussion upon this matter. When one tries to understand the reason behind the interracial marriage, it can be seen that there are differences in the life of a black person and white person in US. The desire of a black person to marry a white person can be termed as the desire to attain high social status. But the reality is that the interracial marriages take place between couples who are equal in social status and education. Most of the teenagers are of the opinion that interracial dating and marriage will not result in social difference. The educated women who indulge in interracial relations tend to select partners within or above their social and economic class. The women among African America race are ready to risk their life by marrying below their socioeconomic class. This is because the rate of eligible men to marry among this racial group is rare. These women are forced to marry men from other races. So the interracial marriages can be considered as attempt to resolve the problem of ever widening gap of ethnic divide. But it represents only a small percent of all the racial inequalities. But the role of interracial marriage as a safety valve to resolve the problems among different races in a society is so important. The future scope of interracial marriage is that the mixed race children gradually help to reduce the influence of racial boundaries that have long divided the nation. The increased rate of interracial marriages does not prove that racism and racial segregation is over. But it helps the racists to act more severe against these people. Now there is a tendency among the Native Americans that they like to marry whites not the blacks. Because of the efforts of the people who are not against racial segregation, the census Bureau was forced to change its rules and this allows the people to identify themselves by as many of the five official racial reporting categories as they see fit. This provides the people with the chance to take a decision of their own. The problem that is to be resolved is that the interracial marriage rate between blacks and other minorities show that blacks remain outside the mainstream of the American Society. The children who are born in interracial marriages face the problem of identity. While choosing culture, language, rituals and religion these children face some problems which are to be resolved. But the parents can guide these children to the right way. Eleanor Stanford in- Interracial America: opposing viewpoints makes clear that the problem of School segregation is a serious problem. (Stanford, 2006).

From the school, students learn more about the society. When some schools or some children in a particular school are segregated, they feel ill about the society. It will hinder the growth of the student to a duty conscious citizen.

The interracial marriage is the barometer of racial, ethnic relations in the US. So the recent changes in racial classical classification, rapid demographic changes in American society. Growing biracial population fuelled the growth of interracial marriages between black and white. The reason behind the growth is, the rapid immigration, cohabitation, educational opportunities, and the ethnic groups like to forget and depart from their past. In 1990ies, there was a significant increase in intermarriage between blacks and whites. The latest tendency that can be seen in American society is that the people who are highly educated are not against interracial marriage. They possess a secular outlook. For example, the educated people among the Hispanics and Asian Americans are not against interracial relations. The most important role played by interracial marriages in American society is that it helped to break down the existing racial barriers set by the orthodox society. Moreover, this marriage pattern provided racial identification to blacks in America. The children from black intermarriages are racially identified from their family background. The study undertook by the US census prove that the nation is interested in mixed race people. So, it is evident from these points discussed that the multiracial people serve as a bridge for communal harmony between white and black. Studies related to the couples of interracial marriage prove that the stress that they feel due to the problems in their private life is high. There is more chance for break up. But this fact is not helpful to reduce the rate of interracial marriages.

The reason behind the interracial relations and the increases rate of marriage is in the steady flow of immigrants to the U.S. This helps the society to become more and more diverse. It helped to reduce the gap among various races and ethnic groups in America. The popularity and support among the younger generation towards interracial prove that there will be an increase in interracial marriages.

By exerting maximum pressure on the issue of racial segregation, interracial marriages influenced the socio, economic, and political spheres of the United States. The increased rate of interracial marriage is to be considered as the progress of a multicultural towards communal harmony. The development of interracial relation and interracial marriage is to be termed as the development of a multicultural society. The increased rate of interracial marriage explains the fact that it is a natural phenomenon because the society is with diverse population. The people who are angered in interracial marriage face the problem of money and housing but most of them are able to solve these problems or they are able to overcome these problems. The surveys conducted among the teenagers prove that there will be an increase in interracial marriages. In this new millennium, the borders which are set on race are so thin and it will not survive. The new age is of universal love and harmony. The new world is so powerful that it is able to reduce the whole world to a single village. The development of a society can be measured through the attitude of the people towards the social issues and how they react. When one considers the history of American Society, it is evident that the blacks were under racial segregation. Now, the situation is different and the people are ready to accept blacks as the part of society. The most important evidence of development of American society is that it is gradually accepting the interracial marriages and relations. So it can be seen that the interracial Marriage in American society is able to reduce the influence of race over humanity. The fore coming years will prove that humanity and universal brotherhood is above the narrow feeling on race and ethnicity.

References

  1. Bolton, Keneth., & Feagin, Joe. R. (2004). Black in blue: American police officers and racism. Consuls.
  2. Feagin, Joe., & OBrien, Eileen. (2003). White men on race: power, privilege, and the shaping of cultural consciousness. Consuls.
  3. Jay. A. Sigler. (1998). Civil rights in America: 1500 to the present. Consuls.
  4. Katz, Bruce., & Lang, Robert. E. (Eds.). (2006). Redefining Urban And suburban America. Consuls.
  5. Stanford, Eleanor. (Ed.). (2006). Interracial America: Opposing viewpoints. Consuls.
  6. Williams, Mary. E. (Ed.). (2001). Interracial marriage: Opposing viewpoints. Consuls.
  7. Walker, Samuel., Spohn, Cassia., & Delone, Miriam. (2007). The color of justice: race, ethnicity, and crime in America. Consuls.

Irony of Marriages in an Indian Set Up

Introduction

Cultural customs are an institution in themselves. They exhibit the true colors of society and differentiate one region from another. Taking a cue from the above statement, Ive thrown some light on the institution of marriage, with special regards to an Indian setup. Over here, the institution of marriage can well be compared as an antonym to its western counterpart. While the concept is ironic in certain ways, it mainly focuses on divulging the hidden secrets of a rich cultural norm, which otherwise, would have remained under the veil of uncertainty.

Irony of Marriages in an Indian Set Up

According to iloveindia (2009), a cultural norm is often defined as a state wherein you cannot initiate a thought or execute an action. In this scenario, you happen to be a slave of a creation, which happened to be an ethos of a set of principles that have been brought down, preserved and executed for a fairly long time. Taking a cue from the above statement, it would not be incorrect to state that a cultural norm is an occurrence that has no beginning and no end. It has been created in the ancient past and it is deemed to continue for generations to come. If we take the example of attending a marriage of a loved one, we would all agree that in accordance to the cultural norms, you need to attend the engagement ceremony, become a part of the main marriage ceremony and finally bless and congratulate the newly married couple by becoming an active part of the reception dinner.

Taking a cue, from the above paragraph, let us now expand the above-mentioned thoughts and streamline these ideas into a single stream of thought, backed by appropriate action. Over here, we would choose a single cultural norm, which, as mentioned in the introductory paragraph, would continue to be the institution of marriage. In this scenario, we would be taking into consideration a specific country and unlike a broad perspective, we would be zeroing in on a particularly interesting aspect of marriage, which, unlike the previous view, would concentrate on the method through which an individual is forced to choose his/her partner. Let me now take this discussion forward and throw light on this intriguing aspect by citing a specified example in an Indian setup.

Most people are not familiar with an Indian marriage. Unlike what you all thought, this is not the name of a Hollywood blockbuster in the making. On the contrary, it deals with a specific aspect, which is ironically hidden from the rest of the world but is satirically prevalent in a typical Indian setup. The reason why I attached humor to the entire concept is that this particular aspect of marriage is ironic when compared with the global model. While in the west, a marriage is said to be a freedom of choice, wherein a partner has all the rights to choose a partner, regardless of gender, in India, marriages are supposed to be made in heaven. Ironical isnt it. Please do not get perturbed; for the statement does not imply that God almighty, would be forced to relinquish his heavenly thrown each time he is supposed to find a suitable match, for that would hardly leave any time for him to sit on it. On the contrary, it is a belief, which can well be attributed to the rigidity of an Indian cultural norm that forces its followers to believe that the institution of marriage is indeed a handiwork of the almighty (Kamat, 2009).

If we are to take a closer look at this cultural norm, we would need to explain the entire episode through the means of a practical example. Let us take an example wherein a young couple has reached the ripe age of marriage and is on the lookout for the ideal companion. Now, unlike their western counterparts, who would ideally seek each other on a personal basis, which in turn could either be in a movie hall, a bowling court, a pub, in the office, or at the golf course, an Indian couple would hardly interact before their marriage. Over here, it is the parents who act as sacred matchmakers. Taking this example further, we can categorically state that an ideal marriage ceremony in an Indian setup, involves the need for a girls parent to seek a suitable match for their aging girl, by paying a visit to the boys parents. Over here, it is the parents who decide the future bride and groom. They are the final decision-makers and at that particular moment, it is the parents who act as the final decision-makers, stating, by the cultural norms, that it is the will of the almighty which is forcing them to act in the best interest of their children. Over here, the children have no right to reject a groom, or a bride, which has been selected by their respective parents. According to country studies (2009), in case they happen to oppose their parents choice, they are branded as social outcasts and looked upon as disrupters of an ancient cultural norm.

Conclusion

If I am to give a personalized opinion on this kind of a setup, I would never mince my words and would clearly state that unless and until a boy and the girl is allowed to meet and interact, an institution of marriage would be no less than a case of forced opinion, that has been formulated by the parents and shielded as a will of the almighty in the armory of a stoic cultural norm.

Marriage and Physical Well-Being

Abstract

This research was investigating a possible link between marriage and increased physical health. Current research indicates that individuals who are part of a strong marital relationship experience increased benefits to their health with lower complaints of chronic or long term illness or physical handicaps. The research also indicated an additional correlation among marriage, physical well being and religion. This combination of life choices results in an increased quality of life as well as an increased life span. Additional research needs to be performed to ensure that this correlation is more then a statistical anomaly. This research demonstrates the correlation in order to provide a basis for future research.

Introduction

This research paper is attempting to answer the question Does a decline in health affect the marital quality reported by the sick person or by the spouse, as well as what factors moderate the effects of health declines on marital quality. This research is important because it would provide an increased understanding of one of the many factors that can affect a marital relationship. By understanding the relationship between health and marital well being additional support programs could be developed to decrease the negative marital effects that the prolonged illnesses of one spouse can cause.

Humans are social creatures who have experience a wide variety of benefits when involved in social relationships. These relationships provide a variety of benefits such as companionship, shared resources and increased health benefits. When researching social relationships it is shown that the marital relationship provides the greatest significance for improving health when compared to those that are unmarried (Umberson, et al, 2006). However it wrong to assume that any marriage is better then no marriage when considering these health benefit. A marriage that has increased levels of stress or other negative connotations is believed to dame the health and well being of the individuals living through that situation (Umberson, et al, 2006). Among married individuals those that chose to describe there relationship as a distressed relationship exhibited a greater risk for poor health. This risk for poor health when compared to individuals who had experienced a divorce demonstrated a higher risk for poor health then the divorced individual (Umberson, et al, 2006).

In scripture the following quote can be used to understand the relationship between a good marriage and good health. Behold, I will bring it health and cure, and I will cure them, and will reveal unto them the abundance of peace and truth (Jer 33:6). When individuals are experiencing large amounts of stress or unhappiness one of the first things to suffer is their health. This scripture while speaking of Jesus could also be used in describing marriages. When a couple creates better communication strategies and begins to repair their marriage the health of the two individuals begins to improve. While this could be as slight an improvement as the decrease in high blood pressure these small changes can add up to increased health benefits. When individuals are experiencing peace and are not in stressful situations they are more likely to exhibit good health and fewer medical complaints. As individuals age they undergo several emotional and physical changes that a stable relationship such as marriage can elevate the distress that could be caused by these transitions. The first event is the psychological event of aging in which the companionship of marriage provides increased comfort. During this time stable relationships provide an increased level of effect on those individuals well being (Umberson, et al, 2006). Second as individuals age the immunological impairment increases and the stress of poor marital quality might increase the rate of the decrease of their immune system.

Spirituality

Spirituality can be defined in many different ways. In this paper spirituality will be defined as the spirit of the soul which is often referred to in a religious or moral context. Through this definition individuals use spirituality to connect with a higher power that provides meaning and direction in their lives (Baker, 2003). Individuals that have decided to make the commitment that is inherent in a marriage exhibit a higher degree of spirituality then those that do not decide to make that level of commitment (Baker, 2003).

The first level of spirituality is the participation in organized religions. Through participation in these religious events individuals develop a deeper spiritual understanding which could provide them with better skills for coping with stressful or traumatic situations. As an individual join churches or church groups these religious beliefs provide an increase in physical health and an increased focus on medical procedures and concerns (Baker, 2003).

Effects of Death and Divorce

There are many studies that have shown a correlation between death and increased illnesses of the surviving spouse. However there have only been a few studies done that illustrate the effect of divorce on the health of the participants (Prigerson, Maciejewski, and Rosenheck, 1999). By understanding the effect that a death or divorce will have on the health of the members it is possible to extrapolate that a healthy marriage will provide a form of protection for the husband and wife.

The dissolution of a marriage combined with the poor quality of the marriage leading up to the divorce is associated with the decline of both mental and physical health resulting in the increased use of medical professionals including those in the mental health field (Prigerson, Maciejewski, and Rosenheck, 1999). For individuals in a healthy marriage with few stressors on both parties experience decreases medical complaints. This can be seen in better sleep habits fewer symptoms of depression and less visits to the doctors office. Widowhood has been associated with a decrease in health but not an increase in greater health services (Prigerson, Maciejewski, and Rosenheck, 1999). Women who were separated or divorced did not experience depression but increased use of mental service facilitates.

The end of a marriage increases the risk for both mental and physical health problems. However while the end of a marriage increases the risk for these problems the inverse is also true (Prigerson, Maciejewski, and Rosenheck, 1999). Women who were part of a good marriage with low stress have a form of protection against these medical and mental illnesses.

Marital Status and Health

Individuals who are married have been known to have the best ratio of mental and physical health when compared to single individuals. Individuals who have experienced the least amount of good health both physical and mental health, were those that had been married but either experienced a divorce or a death. The health advantage that married couples experience remains through various stages of life and aging (Murphy, Glasser and Grundy, 1997). The advantages have been seen through several different measures of health indicators. These include mortality, hospital admissions combined with the length of time spent at the hospital and chronic conditions resulting in a decrease in mobility (Murphy, Glasser and Grundy, 1997).

There are three theories that have been advanced by researchers in order to account for the variations in the health status of married individuals. The first of the theories is that through a selection process individuals that are unhealthy are less likely to either marry or remain married for a life time (Murphy, Glasser and Grundy, 1997)

. In this case the individuals prior ill health is the catalyst for preventing individuals from participating in a marriage. The selection process could also be used to explain the health benefits associated with remarriage. In this case individuals that are unhealthy would be less likely to remarry increasing the statistical advantage of marriage on health.

The second theory focuses on the benefits of emotional and social support that is found through the partnership of marriage. Spouses may focus on increasing beneficial lifestyle choices such as limiting alcohol and cigarettes as factors that could decrease their spouses lifespan (Murphy, Glasser and Grundy, 1997). Individuals who are married could benefit increased health due to the social camaraderie that sharing a life with another individual can bring. In many cases older individuals who live alone have a poorer diet and lower moral then older individuals with either a spouse or room mate.

The third explanation for the difference between married and divorced individuals is that the stress of the death or divorce has a negative consequence on the individuals health and lifestyle (Murphy, Glasser and Grundy, 1997). These increased stressors and the adverse health consequences might be compounded by the social effects associated with this change of status.

In scripture there is a quote Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health even as they soul prospereth (3Jn 1:2), this quote indicates that while a soul is at peace and not in a stressful situation that there health will prosper. When two individuals who are part of a family unit can grow in their relationships with themselves and the Lord they will experience an increase in physical health. Regretfully the inverse of this scripture is also true, when a relationship is growing apart and becoming more distant with more stress the individuals relationships with the Lord will suffer as well. This disharmony in their lives has the possibility of negatively affecting their health.

Statistical Information

Men who were still living in private household in their first marriage reported the lowest rate of limiting chronic illness until they reached the age of seventy-five years old. After that point the single men in the same age bracket reported fewer instances of chronic illnesses (Murphy, Glasser and Grundy, 1997). Conversely at ages under sixty, single men reported the highest prevalence of chronic illnesses. For women who are living in single households reported the lowest rate of chronic illness until the age of seventy-five. After that point the single women reported less instances of chronic illness (Murphy, Glasser and Grundy, 1997).

Changes in the marital status of individuals in todays society reflect an increasing amount of divorce and remarriage. Because the long-term illness rates are higher among individuals who experienced a divorced and then a second or third marriage as this population grows health care providers should increase the illness prevention education programs in order to decrease the risks that this population is prone toward.

Effect of Illness on Marriage

Several explanations that can be used to explain why there can be a notable decline in the health and marital satisfaction of married couples due to a prolonged illness. While the effects that a change in a spouses health can have on the quality of marital satisfaction can be more pronounced in some couples then by others understanding that these effects are an experienced in a variety of ways will increase the effectiveness of a program (Booth and Johnson, 1994).

The first explanation is that declines in healthy will typically involve some impairment in everyday functions which will result in fewer hours worked contributing to a decreased income. The decrease in income can cause the income to be diverted from regular expenses to cover the medical expenses. It is a well known correlation that declines in income combined with financial hardships is known to have adverse effects on marital quality (Booth and Johnson, 1994).

The second explanation focuses on the change in the division of labor in the household that is a result of a long or protracted illness. The individual that is healthy becomes responsible for maintaining a source of income provides transportation and support for the ill individual and then also has to maintain the household. These increased responsibilities combined with a stressful situation can become a source of marital unhappiness especially if the healthy individual feels that the division of labor is unfair or demining to their partnership (Booth and Johnson, 1994).

The third explanation is that an individual whose health is declining may not be able to participate in as many activates outside the home as the couple had previously. Shopping, vacations, and evenings out may be the result of declining health or income. By spending less time together engaged in pleasant activities can result in a decline in marital happiness (Booth and Johnson, 1994).

The fourth explanation is that declines in health are often associated with depression. Symptoms of depression can include increased moodiness, quick anger, decrease in communication and hypercritical behavior. These forms of behavior are known to interfere with the overall quality of a relationship (Booth and Johnson, 1994).

Marital Strengths

In order for marriages to succeed it is important that there is stability and a high quality level. Some research has shown that by increasing the amount of time spent working toward a stronger marriage include such actives as spending time together, communication, religious orientation and positive crisis management skills. By focusing on increasing the religious orientation of the family the family is able to increase the level of appreciation, commitment to family and ability to handle crisis (Robinson and Blanton, 1993).

When a family or marriage is going through a stressful situation such as a long term illness having the ability to continue to communicate will increase the health of the relationship. Therefore even during a period of high stress and financial instability marriages can be strengthened instead of torn down (Robinson and Blanton, 1993).

Health and Religion

In researching the topic marriage and increased health the research has consistently shown that one of the most positive benefits of marriage is increased physical health resulting in a longer life. In comparison with unmarried people, married individuals are less likely to suffer from a long term illness such as cancer or heart disease (Waite and Lehrer, 2003). They experience fewer physical complaints and also have a decreased risk of death from various occurrences. When a longitudinal analysis was conducted with a large national sample married individuals were documented to have a lower mortality rate then those that were not married (Waite and Lehrer, 2003).

There is also a correlation of increased health with increased involvement with religious organizations. Individuals with a strong focus on religion have demonstrated increased health benefits on such diverse medical complaints as stroke, heart disease and cancer (Waite and Lehrer, 2003). Individuals with a strong religious inclination also demonstrate increased levels of self-esteem, lower incidences of depression and decreased dependencies on alcohol and drug abuse (Waite and Lehrer, 2003).

Recent studies have also demonstrated a correlation between mental health and happiness. This body of research suggests that individuals who choose to get married and remain married to the same person enjoy better mental health then those that either never were married or who were divorced (Waite and Lehrer, 2003). This research indicates that there are significant improvements in an individuals emotional health and well being through the course of a marriage. This emotional well being shows a marked decline when the union is severed (Waite and Lehrer, 2003).

While the body of research will continue to grow and develop, the current research demonstrates that individuals who attended a religious service more then once and week compared to those who never attended experience an additional seven years of life (Waite and Lehrer, 2003). When a strong connection to a religious organization combined with a strong marriage current research indicates that individuals can extend their life expectancy for up to twenty years (Waite and Lehrer, 2003).

Conclusion

There is a large body of evidence that shows that there is a correlation between increased health and marital relationships. While it is true that not all marital relationships are equally beneficial to increasing the health of the husband and wife, a happily married couple will receive additional health benefits. The negative aspects of marriage appear to create more of a negative effect on the married couple as the couple ages.

The life course perspective suggests that men and women experience relationships differently across the life span in ways that have the possibility of affecting both the marital quality and health consequences. Because research has shown that women are more likely to react poorly to marital stress maintaining the marriage at a high level through effective communication and other good habits will create a stronger effect in the promotion of good health for both the husband and the wife.

A secondary consideration when comparing men and women is that women are more likely to seek outside assistance if their marriage is experiencing difficulties. While this assistance might be in the form of advice from friends rather then from a licensed mental health professional this release of frustrations and complaints might provided the necessary release of stress allowing their immune system to better handle other factors that could cause it to become weaker and more susceptible to illness.

In analyzing the research it has been demonstrated that there is a strong correlation between marriage, strong religious tendencies and increased health. This research indicates that additional research would prove beneficial in understanding these correlations. A larger group study would assist in determining if these correlations are statistical anomalies or if the combination of strong involvement in organized religion and a stable marriage can positively impact physical well being.

References

Baker, David C. (2003). Studies of the Inner Life: The Impact of Spirituality on Quality of Life. Quality of Life Research. 12, 51-57.

Booth, Alan and Johnson, David R. (1994).Declining Health and Marital Quality. Journal of Marriage and the Family 56(1), 218  223.

Murphy, Mike; Glasser, Karen; and Grundy, Emily. (1997). Marital Status and Long- Term Illness in Great Britain. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 59 (1), 156  164.

Prigerson, Holly G, Maciejewski, Paul K and Rosenheck, Robert A. (1999) the Effects of Marital Dissolution and Marital Quality on Health Service Use among Women. Medical Care. 37(9), 858-873.

Robinson, Linda C and Blanton, Priscilla W. (1993). Marital Strengths in Enduring Marriages. Family Relations. 42(1), 38-45.

Umberson, Debra; Williams, Kristi; Powers, Daniel A; Liu, Hui and Needham, Belinda. (2006). Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 47(1), 1-16.

Waite, Linda J and Lehrer, Evelyn L. (2003). The Benefits from Marriage and Religion in the United States: A Comparative Analysis. Population and Development Review. 29(2), 255-275.

Cohabitation Before Marriage

Cohabitation in marriage is a situation where two people decide to live together before they are legally married. This situation is most prevalent commonly in young people who want to escape the pressures of everyday life. This arrangement has got its own merits and demerits. In most cases, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. This condition is not only applicable to young people but also to elder people who, in one way or the other, find themselves in a situation where they have to compromise. This situation has been compounded by the fact that we live in a society where moral values have become a thing of the past. Cohabiting before marriage is also called come we stay. Many people prefer this to legal marriage, but I beg to differ. (Kamp ,2003)

One of the many disadvantages of cohabiting is that in this condition, you are never sure of your partners next move. This is due to the fact that there is no binding bond between the two of you. In an ordinary marriage setting, the legal aspects of the marriage are well taken care of in such a way that if anything happened to one of the partners, then there would be no scenarios that would make the other partner miserable. There has been situations where when one partner dies there arise disputes about custody. This is more so, especially where the husband passes away without having left behind a legal document to prove that the woman he was living with was his rightful wife. (Stanley, 2004)

Another disadvantage for cohabiting is that you dont feel that you have ownership of your partner. In many societies before marriage, you have to pay dowry. This makes you to be recognized by every side of the families unlike the come we stay scenario where in most cases no one knows that you are even staying together. In rare cases this has led to some cases where people have been known to be killed by their partners and legal action couldnt be taken since no one knew that they were living together at the time. (Kamp ,2003)

There are many other disadvantages for cohabiting before marriage, but the other major one I would like to highlight is the cause of broken families. Its a proven fact that many of this come we stay arrangements do not last. When a marriage breaks, it also leaves one heartbroken, and this is a cause of great misery and suffering. This has also led to the increase of single parents. This leaves one (especially the mother) on their own to bring up the children. This has impacted on our society negatively. Recent studies show that children brought up to single parents are more lawless than children from a functional family.( Cohan & Kleinbaum,2002)

The only advantage of cohabitation before marriage is that it gives you a chance to get to know your partner well before you get to make the lifetime devotion to stay with them. Many people have been known to break up amicably after realizing that they are better off living apart than being married. This can only be achieved if you live with someone over a time and learn them. (Bumpass & Lu,2000)

Its only fair that people go for the right way of marriage since the merits outweigh the demerits. This will help bring order to our society when families become more functional. This will also cut down on the governments expenditure in raising children in care centers whose parents parted ways after disagreeing.

List of References

Bumpass, L. L., & Lu, H. H. (2000). Trends in cohabitation and implications for children s family contexts in the United States. Population Studies, 54, 2941.

Cohan, C. L., & Kleinbaum, S. (2002). Toward a greater understanding of the cohabitation effect: Premarital cohabitation and marital communication. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 180192.

Kamp Dush, C. M., Cohan, C. L., & Amato, P. R. (2003). The relationship between cohabitation and marital quality and stability: Change across cohorts?Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 539549.

Stanley, S. M., Whitton, S. W., & Markman, H. J. (2004). Maybe I do: Interpersonal commitment and premarital or nonmarital cohabitation. Journal of Family Issues, 25, 496519.

How I Met Your Mother: Ideas of Marriage

Introduction

One of the most prominent themes of the sitcom How I Met Your Mother is marriage. Many different relationships were portrayed in the show, as well as the main characters attempts at finding the love of his life. The show provides a comedic outlook on relationship dynamics, assortative mating, homogamy, and romantic marriage.

Main body

The series revolves around a group of friends in the mid-2000s to mid-2010s, New York. The inciting incident is a long-term couple, Marshall and Lily, getting engaged, which motivates their best friend and flatmate Ted to go on a quest to find his future wife. The group also includes Barney, a womanizer and a liar with father issues, and Robin, a tomboyish Canadian news reporter, traumatized but toughened by her fathers attempts at rearing her as a man. The story spans nine years, in which they struggle with their careers, emotional issues, relationship difficulties, and aging.

The central relationship throughout the series is Marshall and Lilys marriage, with its ups and downs, individual quirks, and their influence on each other. The relationship is mainly homogamous, as they both have secondary education, similar interests, and the same social circle. Researchers note that such homogenous couples are more likely to go from cohabitation to marriage (Zang & Zhao, 2017), which is precisely what happened in this case. Moreover, their long-term romantic involvement grew out of propinquity, as they lived in the same dormitory. They spent most of their time together, drinking, watching movies, and smoking marijuana. Their interaction is that of mutual care, intimate understanding of each other, and honest communication, which at times is played for laughs, but mostly serves as the shows moral lesson.

The importance of homogamy is further reinforced by Barney and Robins relationship that grows by the end of the series. They are both independent, thrill-seeking, and damaged by their childhood. Luo (2017) notes that mental well-being, psychopathology, and substance abuse are conducive to a successful long-term relationship. While Lily and Marshalls marriage is that of mutual care and communication, Barney and Robin enjoy alcohol, travel, and promiscuity. Their relationship was portrayed as ultimately unsuccessful both times they attempted it because they were a bad influence on each other and reinforced each others vices.

Ted prioritizes assortative mating throughout the series, as his standards for a partner are high, and he wants his future wife to be similar to him in order to facilitate a harmonious household. That is not to say he did not want romantic feelings and passion, but he tried to introduce judgment in his partner selection as well. He courted many women during the series, and many of them he discarded due to insufficient similarity or insufficient romance. In the end, the woman Ted married shared remarkable similarities with him. They were also passionately in love, and the relationship they ended up having was portrayed as very successful.

The image of a good marriage that the series creates is that of strong romantic feelings and considerable homogeneity in character traits, education, and interests, which tends to correlate with scientific evidence (Luo, 2017). An outsider of the American culture may assume that Americans predominately marry for love, value child-rearing, live apart from their extended families and enjoy weddings.

Conclusion

Overall, the series creates a somewhat traditional image of marriage and projects such values as love, common ground, and communication as the cornerstones of a good relationship. The successful couples the show focuses on follow that pattern, while the more tragic stories deviate from it in meaningful ways. It is by no means an exhaustive account of American marital culture, but some lessons may be derived from it and even matched with academic evidence.

References

Luo, S. (2017). . Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11(8), e12337.

Zang, X., & Zhao, L. X. (2017). Handbook on the family and marriage in China. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Same-Sex Marriage Representation in American Media

Culture, in most societies, consists of characteristics such as liberalism, conservatives, free expression, risk-taking, political structures, competitiveness, and materialism. There are also certain ideologies that form the basis of culture. These include; democracy, egalitarianism, and individualism. The variety witnessed in culture is also a result of demographic diversity. Gay marriages have been portrayed differently in the photos and text collected from websites. The media portrayal ranges from negative to positive, majorly because a member of the community has long been in battles with the society trying to challenge the negative stereotypes against them. However, it was only until recently that the society began embracing homosexuals within the community resulting in a shift in media coverage of gays and lesbians (Kirste, 2007).

Due to the general freedom existing in societies such as America, the media is used to air the voices and rights of gay people. The idea of gay and same-sex relationships is not condemned in America. In fact, same-sex marriages have been legalized in numerous states. The laws provide a mechanism to protect people from the personal relationship decisions that they make. For instance, it is hard to find the gay and lesbian community being discriminated against in public or under any circumstances simply because of the cover they receive from the law. However, there are certain societies where gays and lesbians are openly discriminated against. In such societies, the media is used to condemn such people and to make them feel rejected in society (Kirste, 2007). In some of the photos, gays and lesbians do not want to reveal their identity for fear of their lives.

The general view about marriage, therefore, is based on personal choice, not a societal necessity (Kirste, 2007). This means that people will not be forced to marry or coerced to make any such decision from social pressure; however, it is a personal choice. The only thing that is not encouraged when it comes to a personal relationship is early marriages. Children, before they reach the age of eighteen, cannot make any decision on their own. They stay under the direct care of their parents. They cannot be left to make a personal marriage decision (Filetti, 2001).

In American culture, high value is placed on individual self-reliance. People are encouraged to depend on themselves without having to be influenced by external forces. Therefore every decision that people make is highly influenced by their internal needs and dreams (Filetti, 2001). Everyone is encouraged to follow whatever they have passion for. It is the only way in which people can feel inspired to make positive contributions to society and feel happy about whatever they do. This is unlike collectivists cultures, where personal choices and passions are disregarded in society. In such societies, the aim is on group initiatives. People do things together, cooperate, and can make a decision on behalf of individuals (Filetti, 2001).

In most cases, situations that lead to long term friendships are not encouraged. Friendships are only expected to be casual without any attachments. They are not supposed to chain or entangle an individual to the point that they now feel obliged or having a duty to pay to the other partner. There is, therefore, that general avoidance of interdependence in relationships (Filetti, 2001).

The media in American culture, however, advocates for some principles to be observed in family and personal relationships. The first thing is happiness. In order for people to be very productive in life and venture into risks in a bid to follow their dreams, they have to be happy. Happiness begins from personal relationships by respecting the decision that people, which leads to their happiness. This is why there are very many people who live public lives that have gone public about their sexual orientation. It is, in fact, stigmatized to hide ones orientation. Some of these orientations are not a result of psychological problems. The idea of gay and same-sex relationships is not condemned in American media.

Generally, people would interact without developing any emotional attachment or hatred for the personal relationship decision that their neighbors make. Same-sex couples, as well as straight couples and single individuals, can become friends without any emotional attachment. These incidences are very common in residential areas and in colleges. It is also a common thing in American culture to find a man a woman not yet married living together as housemates and roommates. Sometimes these relationships end up into marriage while sometimes they end up into breakups. The freedom to do all these things without being bothered by social norms and standards is what makes the culture of America so unique.

According to other cultures, some of these things which are permissible in American culture are a complete taboo. This means that they are found abnormal and therefore prohibited by laws. The issue of remarrying is stigmatized in many other cultures all across the world.

References

Filetti, J. S. (2001). From Lizzie Borden to Lorena Bobbitt: Violent Women and Gendered Justice. Journal of American Culture, 471484.

Kirste, L. (2007). Collective Effort: Archiving LGBT Moving Images. Cinema Journal , 134-140.

Child Marriage in the Middle East Countries

Child marriage is a significant concern in some parts of todays world, especially in the Middle East and North Africa. It can be defined as the marriage of a child under the age of eighteen (UNICEF South Asia, n.d.). Although the problem affects both girls and boys, it has a disproportional impact on females. Currently, there are 650,000,000 child brides in the world (UNICEF Middle East and North Africa, 2018). It means that the problem is acute and should be addressed.

One can learn about child marriage not only from news articles but also from books, such as I Am Nujood, Age 10 and Divorced. This autobiography tells the story about Nujood, the young woman who was nine years old when her parents arranged her marriage to the man that was three times older than she was (Ali & Minoui, 2010). The book shows that families sell their daughters to older men without the girls consent. In the autobiography, Nujood talks about the sexual and physical abuse she experienced during her marriage. The examples from the book reveal the horrific truth about child marriage in the Middle East region and the world.

The problem of child marriage is particularly acute in the Middle East region, as one in five girls is married under the age of fifteen (UNICEF Middle East and North Africa, 2018). Child marriage rates are different within the area, with Iraq and Yemen showing the highest prevalence of the issue. For example, in Yemen, almost 35% of women between 20 and 24 years old were first married between the ages of fifteen and nineteen (UNICEF Middle East and North Africa, 2018). In Iraq, the rates are up to 25%; moreover, 5% of young female adults are first married under the age of fifteen. Oman shows the lowest child rates in the region, approximately 5% and 1% respectively.

References

Ali, N. & Minoui, D. (2010). I am Nujood, age 10 and divorced. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.

UNICEF Middle East and North Africa. (2018). A profile of child marriage in the Middle East and North Africa. Web.

UNICEF South Asia. (n.d.). Child marriage. Web.

Same-Sex Marriage: Marriage Laws Features

In the United States, married couples receive many legal benefits that couples who live together but are unmarried do not. More and more, gay couples are insisting that they receive the same legal rights that traditional, heterosexual married couples receive. However, fierce public and state and U.S. congressional opposition to gay marriage has built legal barriers which prevent homosexuals from marrying.

Marriage laws, established by the state, ensure that the couples who do get the benefits of marriage are those who benefit the state by having children. Since individuals involved in a same sex relationship cannot bear children that would ultimately add to the tax base of a community, there is no incentive for the state to recognize their union and provide them the benefits of marriage, an expensive burden to the state (Kolasinksi, 2004). However, as citizens of the United States, all people are guaranteed the inalienable right to pursue happiness. It does not exclude on the basis of sexual preference. The government was originally formed as an entity meant to champion the rights of the individual whether they are on the majority or minority side of public opinion. Laws that were enacted in the South disallowed the marriage between black and white people but were struck down by the Supreme Court and in 1964 the Civil Rights Act followed the tenets of the Constitution by prohibiting discrimination. The opposition to gay marriage is based on prejudice and, as time passes, the concept will become more and more accepted. It, like racial prejudice, will become socially abhorrent (Sullivan, 2000). In addition, the disallowing of gay marriage by legislation violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, The law [against same-sex marriage] discriminates on the basis of sex because it makes ones ability to marry depend on ones gender (American Civil Liberties Union, 1996).

According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll, about 60 percent of Americans oppose gay marriage. However, the same poll found that 53 percent were against a constitutional amendment outlawing the lawful acknowledgment of same-sex unions (Civil Unions, 2004). This sentiment has been reflected by some legislators such as those in the State of Connecticut who oppose same-sex marriage but support civil unions. Gay rights activists had heavily lobbied lawmakers in an effort to legalize gay marriage, but they compromised on a civil union bill when support for marriage was rejected by most. A Republican governor, M. Jodi Rell, signed the bill making Connecticut the second state to offer gays and lesbians civil unions after Vermont. Rell explained that she signed the bill because she was opposed to discrimination in any form. This law provided all the legal privileges of marriage (Simmons, 2005). Other states such as California and Oregon offer various rights under domestic-partnership laws but not full rights while Massachusetts has allowed gay marriages since 2004, the first state to do so (Abraham & Paulson, 2007). While Connecticut gay rights activist groups applauded state lawmakers, they expressed displeasure that the law fell short of offering a comprehensive equivalence of marriage as its neighbor Massachusetts and that they would persist in their efforts to work toward the day when there are not two lines at town hall, one for them and one for us (Simmons, 2005).

Much as the flag burning issue, Republicans use gay marriage for political advantage. This strategy worked for President Bush in the 2004 election and those trying to keep their jobs on the Hill have learned well from him. The Republican tactic was to put gay-marriage bans on the ballot in each state so as to get more conservative voters to the polls. In Ohio, the key state in Bushs victory, this strategy worked by drawing more voters to the polls even though the ban was entirely unnecessary because gay marriage was already banned by state law. Its a civil rights issue that eventually will be recognized as one in all states, not just Massachusetts and a few others but until then will be used as a political tool.

Works Cited

Abraham, Yvonne & Paulson, Michael. Wedding Day First Gays Marry, Many Seek Licenses. The Boston Globe.

American Civil Liberties Union. Gay Marriage. California: Greenhaven Press, (1996), pp. 14-15.

Civil Unions for Gays Favored, Polls Show. MSNBC. (2004). Web.

Kolasinksi, Adam. The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage. The Tech. Vol. 124, N. 5, (2004).

Simmons, Todd. Civil Compromise. Advocate Report. I. 939, (2005).

An Attempt to Reform the Institution of Marriage in California

On 5th November 2008, Californians cast their votes to mark their stand towards same-sex marriage. This emotional vote was brought about by proposition 8 which called for amendments in the Californian Constitution which recognized same-sex marriages. As it could have been predicted, a majority of the popular vote voted for a yes making it official that same-sex marriages would not be recognized in California. Later, the Californian Supreme Court listened to oral arguments that tried to point out the advantages and disadvantages that would be expected after the passage of proposition 8. Accordingly, the judges of the Supreme Court made a 6-1 decision favoring the upholding of the proposition. As a result, the Californian Constitution stated that Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. This decision though passed to the favor of those who felt that the definition of marriage should only entail a man and a woman only favored a mere 52% of the total voters in California. This means that 48% of the voters representing 4,883,460 people had their views canceled (Garrison et al, 2009). This paper seeks to identify the arguments for and against proposition 8 and thus identify the governments position and what it means.

To have a clear understanding of this proposition, it is important to identify the historical aspect of the argument. In the Year 2000, proposition 22 was passed by the voting residents of California. This proposition sought for a specification in the state law that validated marriages between a man and a woman only. It was therefore officially accepted that only marriages between a man and a woman were recognized in California. Eight years later, the Californian Supreme Court made a ruling specifying that the clause that validated only the marriages between man and woman was violating the constitutional rights of Californians who had same-sex orientation. Their ruling was based on the fact that the Californian Constitution advocated for equal rights for every Californian including those with the same sex orientation. It allowed for their marriage. Accordingly, this ruling led to the validation of same-sex marriages. This remained the fact until the 2009 yes vote for proposition eight which led to the states recognition of opposite-sex marriages only (League of Women Voters, 2008).

Are there valid advantages that would have been accrued if proposition 8 failed? Arguments point out that there are several reasons as to why more than four million people opted to vote for a no as opposed to 5 million others who voted for a yes. It is clear that the Constitution of any given country covers all the groups within the country regardless of their, color, race, age, sexual orientation, religion, economic status, etc. all these people have the right to enjoy the rights as pointed out by the constitution. Breaching of these rights for any given social setup outrightly indicates breaching of the Constitutional specifications which advocate for equality. This is the first argument for the no voters. The voters specified that the formation of the Constitution to sideline the rights of people who have same-sex sexual orientation simply indicates that a group of people has been sidelined and treated differently from other members of the state. Same-sex people should be allowed to enjoy their rights under the protection of the Constitution. This would highlight the meaning of the nation founders who specified that the American society was founded under the law of equal protection. Therefore, providing protection for one group of people and denying other groups simply points out that the principles of the foundation of the American society were broken (League of Women Voters, 2008).

In many societies, marriage is an indication of respect and dignity. It is an institution through which couples are given an opportunity to show their lifetime commitment. As a result, all people have the right and freedom to marry without being conditioned by any person. However, proposition 8 does not recognize this freedom to the small group of lesbians and gays. The denial of recognition of same-sex marriages is denial and blockage of lesbians and gays to show their lifetime commitment to their partners and hence gain their dignity and respect to society. Proposition 8, therefore, acts as a weapon to deny one group of the society such benefits (League of Women Voters, 2008).

It is clear that American society is also founded on the principles of fairness, equality, and freedom for all. Failing to be fair to any of the citizens would be an indication of a failed democracy. This indicates that the Californian Constitution could be an undemocratic one if it allowed for treating a particular group of people unfairly. By passing Proposition 8, the message being clearly sent is that while some citizens decisions to get married are respected and recognized, others are being treated differently and their marriages are not being recognized. This is being unfair and thus going against the foundational principles of American society. In the same perspective, the no voters specified that singling out a small section of the society and refusing to acknowledge them is unfair. All citizens should be allowed to show their love and commitment to their couples unconditionally. This should be done irrespective of the type of the partners sex. It is therefore unfair to treat some serious commitments differently from others (League of Women Voters, 2008).

One thing that the government has no business or does not have the mandate to engage in is an individuals taste and choice. The government has no right to engage in a persons private life. It does not specify the TV channel to watch nor the books to read. It does not have to force a person to believe in a certain religion or belief. All these are individual and personal decisions of a person and the government has to respect and protect each persons decision. Just like the other aspects of an individuals private life is married life. The government has no mandate to choose a partner for any of its citizens. It has no right to tell an individual to love one person and leave the other. Doing this would be taken as a dictatorship. However, this is what the government is doing to the lesbians and gays in California. They are being forced to stop loving the people they really love and want to make a lifetime commitment so that they can love those people they dont have a feeling for. This is being unfair, according to those who voted a no (League of Women Voters, 2008).

This notwithstanding, some people failed to understand why the government should allow for the recognition of same-sex marriages. They felt that the arguments being offered by the opponents of proposition 8 were baseless. They felt that the specifications of proposition 8 did not take away any rights from lesbians and gays. According to the proposition, same-sex marriages and opposite-sex marriages enjoyed equal rights and offered no impositions to one group or the other. The only role played by the proposition was to restore the original meaning of marriage. A meaning held throughout history and even confirmed by Californians in the year 2000 before some judges in San Francisco changed the specification allowing for the recognition of same-sex marriages. Accordingly, the ruling by four judges at the expense of 61% of Californians in 2000 could not be justified (League of Women Voters, 2008).

No parent in this world would be comfortable if his little innocent child would be taught principles that he deems unworthy. This would be even worse if the teachings are about family and health. In fact, Californian law does not allow this. It clearly states that no child can be forcibly taught about health and family issues without the consent of the parents. However, this would not be so if proposition 8 fails. Arguments for point out that failure of proposition 8 means that students would be taught about the definition of marriage that is against their own acceptance. This means that the failure of the proposition would mean that their children would be at risk of understanding what marriage actually is (League of Women Voters, 2008).

In addition to these arguments, other specifications point out the importance of a yes for proposition 8. This does not only look at the value part of the argument but also goes further to identify scholarly proofs of the importance of allowing for opposite-sex marriage only. Pruett (2001) of Yale Child Study Center pointed out that children usually have a deep-seated need for their biological parents. Deriving them of this makes them develop a hunger that could be detrimental to their developmental process. In her study, she goes further to identify that validating homosexual marriages would mean more children who have a hunger for their biological parents, a phenomenon that would lead to a great problem in the cluster of kids under this umbrella. Owing to the fact that most homosexual couples opt for adoption and in vitro fertilization, the children under their care eventually develop the need for a father or a mother who is usually not available. In addition to this, fathers are an important part of a childs developmental process. One of the greatest roles of a father is the removal of antisocial behavior in their children. The presence of a father leads to the reduction of delinquency in boys while in girls it leads to proper sexual activities. Allowing same-sex marriages would mean that children who are adopted or born from in vitro fertilization are innocently subjected to such behavior due to the absence of a father. A study has also indicated that girls who spent their time without their fathers were more at risk of experiencing early puberty and also were more likely to experience early teenage pregnancies as compared to those that spent their lives with their biological fathers (Popenoe, 1999).

Still on the issue of children being exposed to the unworthy environment and thus developing developmental complications, legalizing same-sex marriages would mean that most kids brought up in a same-sex couple family will be exposed to the danger of having gender and sexual disorders. Studies by Stacey and Biblarz (2000) pointed out that physically, the children brought up by same-sex couples tended to portray the opposite sex characteristics. For example, girls brought up in such an environment tended to be more masculine and male-like as opposed to those brought up by a heterosexual couple. On the other hand, male children brought up by same-sex couples tended to be less masculine as opposed to their counterparts who are brought up by a heterosexual couple. Furthermore, children brought up by lesbians tended to have greater chances of developing homoerotic relationships. While the methodology of this research could be pointed out as flawed, it is a clear indication that some aspects of the childrens developmental process could greatly be altered if given chance to live with homosexual parents. This is a very important point to note because same-sex parents would at some point want to have children. The children would then be innocently subjected to such complicated developments because of the specifications of the law. Therefore, it looked important for those who voted a yes to push for their side of the vote.

Sexual fidelity is an important part of marriage. In addition, this would be very essential in the current times of increasing rates of HIV and AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. This was one point to note. Those who voted for a yes pointed out that allowing same-sex marriages would lead to an increase in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases. Their argument was based on the study by Mattison and McWhirter (1984) who found out that homosexuals specifically the gay, were more likely to engage in extramarital affairs as compared to those in heterosexual marriages. In their study, they pointed out that 79% of men and women in heterosexual marriages viewed sexual fidelity as a strong value. This was opposed to 50% of men in gay relationships who felt that sexual fidelity was a strong value. This finding is very essential in the argument for Proposition 8. Allowing homosexuality would encourage more people who would not have joined the group to do so. The results would be drastic. An increase in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases would be experienced.

The decision by the government to allow for the yes vote by the citizens does not only point out the governments decision to listen to its citizens, but it also shows the seriousness of the issue. Basing on the results of scholars concerning the implication of this issue on the government, it is appropriate to understand their decision to consider revising the constitutional specifications since 2008 which allowed for same-sex marriages.

Seeing marriage from an emotional perspective completely diverts it from its fundamental purpose of procreation. Accordingly, allowing for same-sex marriage simply fails to honor the traditional meaning of marriage. It is argued that most of the organizations in contemporary society have defined marriage from its emotional point of view thus allowing for same-sex people to engage in marriage provided they are emotionally attached. While this might appear to be a trivial factor, its economic, political, and social implications are great. This mentality could lead to a population crunch which would implicate greatly on the productivity of the country. For example, countries that have legalized homosexuality have also proved to be the countries with the lowest fertility rate that was rated to be about 1.6 which is far much below the fertility rate of 2.1 which is the standard replacement rate. This means that allowing for same-sex marriage is a matter of government concern. When the population crunch starts setting in, it will be great pressure on the government. It will be the government that will bear the brunt for failing to provide for its citizens (CIA, 2009).

However, the government does not benefit economically from the decision in a short-term perspective. In fact, the government could incur great losses with the refusal to recognize same-sex marriages. With the validity of same-sex marriages, the government would receive great revenues from weddings by same-sex couples which would come in terms of sales tax. Refusal to validate same-sex marriages, therefore, meant that the government would incur losses for a short while. This perspective points out that the government put more weight on the long-term economic implications as opposed to the losses that it could incur from the reduction of sales taxes. This clearly points out the reason why the government had to re-think the stand (League of Women Voters, 2008).

In conclusion, it is clear that both sides of the issue had valid reasons. This could be identified by the results which gave the yes side a narrow victory of four percent. The government, therefore, had to let the decision come from the citizens. On its part, the government considered the economic, political, and social implications of the issue and decided to let the issue be revised and give decisive powers to the citizens. Although it had considered the short-term losses in terms of reduced sales tax, the government knew that the implications of a demographic crunch were more serious as compared to this loss.

References

  1. CIA (2009). Fertility Rates.
  2. Garrison, J., DiMassa, C. And Paddock, R. Voters approve proposition 8 banning same sex marriages. Los Angeles Times.
  3. League of Women Voters of California Education Fund. (2008). Proposition 8 eliminates right of same sex couples to marry. Web.
  4. McWhirter, D. and Mattison, A. (1984). The Male Couple New York: Prentice Hall
  5. Popenoe, D. (1999). Life Without Father. Boston: Harvard University Press
  6. Pruett, K. (2001) Fatherneed.Broadway Books
  7. Stacey, J. and Biblarz, T. (How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter? American Sociological Review 66: 159-183.

Why Same-Sex Marriages Are Ok for All Countries?

I believe that ideas of equality and general happiness are crucial for modern society, and LGBT people are subjects of those rights too. They should be able to marry, live together, and have access to all welfare of society. For me, they are people similar to heterosexual people; they are community members and should have equal rights with everyone else. There is no harm to society from gays, lesbians, or their marriages, and no reason to limit their rights. Same-sex marriages are OK, and there should be no obstacles for everyone who wants to get married.

I cannot see any proof that LGBT people or their marriages can cause harm to society: there is no proof of that. In the research of Langbein et al., researchers studied the effect of same-sex marriage legalization on the rise of childhood poverty, divorce rates, marriage rates, and single-parent household fractions in the United States (4-5). However, none of those rates were found connected with same-sex marriages. Divorce and marriage rate changes continue their trend after the legalization (Langbein et al. 7-8). The single-parent household fraction does not change: thus, it is not essential whether it is an LGBT parent in such a one-parent family or not (Langbein et al. 8-9). Childrens poverty rates remained unchanged and slightly decreased after the legalization (Langbein et al. 6-7). I think that LGBT families are, in fact, beneficial for society, just as any other family: they work and pay taxes along with all.

LGBT people are happier in areas where same-sex marriages are allowed: providing them with a fundamental right to form families legally will increase their happiness. Before legalization, sexual minorities had, in general, less well-being than ordinary people (Boertien). Their lives were affected by institutional discrimination: they could not realize their family rights, for example, in medical institutions. It is hard to be happy when ones close person is in the hospital, and one cannot even visit them legally; I think it is terrible. Despite usually hidden forms, societys discrimination severely reduces the quality of life (Boertien). Allowing LGBT people to form marriages increases the total level of happiness between them and reduces tensions in society, and for me, it is the reason to allow same-sex marriages.

Their legalization influences society in a certain way: there are fewer prejudices toward gays and lesbians in areas where same-sex marriages are legal. In the United Kingdom, after the legalization of same-sex marriages, social stigma has gradually reduced, and same-sex couples well-being has risen (Boertien). In the United States, prejudices toward LGBT people have decreased gradually since 2006, both explicit and implicit (Ofosu et al., 8849). After full legalization at the state level, those prejudices started to decrease more rapidly; however, in the states that did not pass local legalization, those levels did not fall and even started to increase (Ofosu et al., 8849-8850). I conclude from it that legalization makes society more tolerant, less prejudiced, and, consequently, safer and more secure. Such influence of same-sex marriages is, in fact, positive: while there can be discussion about the moral side of same-sex marriages, more tolerant and safe society is clearly an advantage.

For me, the opinion that same-sex marriages are OK and should be allowed is obvious: LGBT people have the same rights as all humans. Not only from a social or legal point of view, but just from a person, they are sentient human beings and should not be discriminated against in any way. All people have the right to be personally happy, regardless of sex, race, orientation, nationality, class, or work occupation. The only reason that the legalization of same-sex marriages has a positive impact on the well-being of LGBT people is enough to legalize them (Boertien). Discrimination harms individuals and society: it creates a feeling of insecurity in all its members. If some group of people is discriminated against, everyone suffers from it. Although slowly, the percentage of the population in the U.K. and the U.S. who accept same-sex marriage legalization is growing; in other European countries, the situation is similar (Haslam). In my opinion, societies in those countries have become healthier and more developed, and it can be proven by research that shows an increase in peoples well-being in those countries in general.

Based on scientific research, I think same-sex marriages are OK and, if allowed, are beneficial for society. They do not make the community less developed or stable; they do not worsen the demography or harm heterosexual people. This legalization makes society better developed: it reduces tensions in society and makes it more tolerant and secure in general. LGBT people only want to live their lives happily and have fundamental rights available to others, such as the right to form families and freedom from discrimination. I believe that this desire is fundamental and should be satisfied in any well-developed society; when discrimination becomes widespread in society, everyone suffers from it. In that way, same-sex marriages should be legalized in all countries that strive for development.

Works Cited

Boertien, Diederik. Legalizing Same-Sex Marriages Improves Subjective Well-Being (in England and Wales). N-IUSSP, 2021.

Haslam, Nick. Attitudes to Same-Sex Marriage Have Many Psychological Roots, and They Can Change. The Conversation, 2017.

Langbein, Laura, et al. The Anti-Social Effects of Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage: Fact or Fiction? Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 2020. pp. 1-18.

Ofosu, Eugene K., et al. Same-Sex Marriage Legalization Associated with Reduced Implicit and Explicit Antigay Bias. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116, no. 18, 2019, pp. 884651.