1. The Future of Homosexual Rights in America
Jamie Pizzi, Alexandra Sol,
Robert Gentile, Diego Villasenor

2. Executive Summary
We recommend a moderate policy of compromise in which the government integrates the homosexual community into the sociopolitical environment with equal rights as heterosexual couples in the form of domestic partnerships.
Because the current situation, particularly in regards to civil unions and adoption of children, is unconstitutional towards homosexual couples.
Why?

3. We propose an amendment to the current marriage law stating that, “There is to be equal treatment of homosexual couples in the form of marriage and adoption rights.”

4. A Brief Background
U.S. history supports the claim that homosexuals have experienced discrimination within American society.
Americans consider to be one of the largest movements of the twenty-first century.
The rights of homosexual people in the United States is an issue that dates back to the commencement of the civil rights movement
But, some scholars argue the issue began earlier than 1951; nearly two centuries earlier, when president Thomas Jefferson purposed a law in 1779 mandating castration for homosexual men and the punishment of nose cartilage mutilation for women intended to make them less appealing.

5. More Background
A number of New England states recently begun to display a more liberal approach by legalizing same sex marriages all preceding the case of Lawrence v. Texas in 2003, when two men Lawrence and Garner were found by police engaging in sexual intercourse in the privacy of their Texas home.
The case has contributed largely to the decisions of some New England states that have recently legalized same sex marriages. The Supreme Court ruled the case unconstitutional saying “sodomy laws in the United States are unconstitutional” gave certain states and their political leaders a chance to act upon what they believe is right according to the constitution.

6. Why does this issue need to be addressed?
Not allowing homosexual couples to obtain equal marital rights is in direct violation of the First Amendment declaration that states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment or religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
The homosexual community has been advocating and pushing for rights for generations. In a democratic society, we cannot simply ignore them.

7. Pre-Existing Policies
Efforts began in the early twentieth century when the Society for Human Rights in Chicago was formed and began to advocate for homosexual emancipation
(However, it was dissolved a few months later because some of the society’s members were arrested)
Forty years after the Society for Human Rights was formed, in 1962, Illinois decriminalized homosexual acts in private.
In 1973, the APA acknowledged that being homosexual was not a mental disorder
At the same time, Harvey Milk, the city supervisor of San Francisco, advocated against governmental intervention in sexuality

8. Pre-Existing Policies Within the last decade
In 1993, President Clinton passed the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Bill” in which he allowed homosexual men and women to participate in the military, but to refrain from any same-sex activity.
In 2010, President Obama voted for the dissolution of this bill.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, Iowa, New Hampshire, DC, New York same-sex marriage is now legal.
Obama supported a legislation called Respect for Marriage Act that advocates for equal rights between homosexual and heterosexual couples
He addressed a Memorandum in which he stated that homosexual couples and families should be entitled to adequate care in hospitals

9. Policy Options Policy A
Not recognizing homosexual couples as equal at all, thus granting them zero recognition in the form of marriage, domestic partnership, or adoption rights. As well as terminating any current domestic partnerships and halting the adoption process for homosexual couples indefinitely.

10. Advantages Disadvantages
Keeps American definition of the “sanctity of marriage” in traditional standing of being solemnly between a man and a woman, thus perpetuating this predominantly revered family structure within American culture.
Violates 1st amendment right of freedom of religion and beliefs.
No further work within congress on the issue, many Americans would agree that there are more pertinent issues that need to be taken care of by the government.
It is a form of minority discrimination because homosexuals commit no crimes or wrongful acts to be discriminated against by the law, yet still are.
It will not cause straight married citizens to feel that their rights are being undermined by having such a drastic shift in the definition of marriage adhere to by the government.
It will cause great unrest from homosexuals and their supporters who have been diligently supporting this cause.
Many deserving homosexual couples will not be able to adopt children, thus causing them to miss out on a fundamental human desire and leaving thousands of children un-adopted leading to further social and economic problems down the line.
It will cause faith to be lost in democratic system considering 60% of voter’s nation wide supported either civil unions (35%) or marriage (25%) in 2004

11. Policy Options Policy B
Creating a compromise in the form of federally recognized domestic partnerships, and allowing states to decide whether or not homosexual couples can have the right to adopt children.

12. Advantages
Disadvantages
Gives homosexual couples the same rights and benefits as married straight couples.
Still neglects to recognize these relationships as completely equal to straight ones, thus perpetuating discrimination
Does not impose on church’s definition of “marriage”, therefore more likely to settle well with the opposition.
There would be increased administration and communication for all companies involved, in order to prevent fraud because domestic partnership status could be abused by any two people who wish to receive the benefits of it.
Promotes diversity by acknowledging the need for acceptance of homosexuals in America to be treated equally.
No official divorce can mean both a flurry of issues when dividing up assets etc and create less stable long-term relationships because of how comparatively easy it is to end a domestic partnership as apposed to a legal common wealth marriage.

13. Policy Options Policy C
Granting homosexual couples the full right to marry and adopt children.

14. Advantages Disadvantages
Grants equality to all citizens regardless of sexual preference or beliefs, which is properly in line with the First Amendment.
It could confuse children about gender roles and expectations of society by introducing this complicated matter to them at a young age, which would be inevitable if homosexual marriage become legal and more prevalent.
It completely acknowledges these relationships as equal to straight ones.
It would enrage religious institutions and go against their historic definition of marriage as only between a man and woman.
It Promotes diversity by acknowledging this at a governmental level.
Some claim that it would cause a slippery slope within the legality of marriage as whole, thus eventually making way for polygamy and other taboo practices to become legally recognized as well.
It promotes a stable family structure and less sexual promiscuity amongst homosexuals because they now have the option to settle down and start a family.
Many religions deem homosexuality as a sin all together, this may create more discrimination against homosexuals because of the anger felt by those who do not approve of this being the law of the land.

15. Recommended Course of Action
We choose the second option of a compromise between giving full rights and completely refusing the homosexual community any at all
This is suggested primarily for the reluctance and issues that would arise from forcing a private institution (the church)
Recognition that the homosexual community is indeed a minority, a group of other humans who are being oppressed
This will allow homosexual couples to enter into a civil partnership, being given all the same legal rights, opportunities, and benefits afforded to a heterosexual couple.