In her post in the blog One Land, Under Six Flags, Sierra H. criticizes the logic behind anti-gay marriage laws. She writes that the Constitution calls for equal protection of the law. This means that no person can be denied certain rights because of their sexual orientation. I agree that this is a very big point in defending gay marriage rights. I find it funny that almost everyone in the US can accept and recognize that denying a person a certain right because they are of a certain race should never happen. It troubles me that some people do not apply this same way of thinking to people who are not heterosexual.

Just like the author points out in her blog post, I agree that much of the resistance towards allowing gay marriages comes from a religious point of you. People are taught from a young age that a higher being does not approve of people that are not heterosexual. This, in turn, makes people support laws that most align with what they have grown up believing. However, I do not think that the law should regulate religious preferences. As Sierra has stated, the law of the land is not should not bring together church and state. The catholic religion states that meat should not be eaten on Fridays during Lent, but this does not mean that there should be a law put in place that fines people for eating anything, but fish during this time.

The part of Sierra’s post that really stuck out to me is that marriage is much more than just a ceremony for two people who are in love to show their love. It is a way that a couple can legally receive state and federal benefits. I remember once seeing a tweet from a classmate in high school saying something along the lines of not being sure if they supported gay marriage because they would not feel comfortable with seeing “two dudes making out on the street.” I think people who are against marriage have a certain level of distress and fear that homosexuality will somehow be encouraged if gay marriage becomes lawful, which is not the case. The fight for gay rights is not asking for people to “turn” gay or for the ability to shove people’s sexual orientation in others’ faces. It is asking for equality and to have the same basic rights as couples who are heterosexual. Overall, I believe that same sex marriage should not be under question at all, as there is nothing in the Constitution that properly states this should not be allowed.