A prevalent issue among individuals in today's society is the idea of gay marriage. This is the idea that two males or two females can be married. Although many people accept this, there are people that try to argue that gay marriage will destroy the concept of marriage and the idea/concept of procreation. Gay marriage was legalized in 2015, but is still a prevalent issue because the opposing side is trying to get the law revoked. Not only is gay marriage a prevalent issue, but so is discrimination against the LGBT community. In reference to the position of supporting gay marriage, the discussion will focus on: the overall idea of gay marriage, discrimination against the LGBT community in the workplace and discrimination against the LGBT community in healthcare. 

According to the Supreme Court, gay marriage is defined as a ceremonial union of two people of the same-sex (Diamond). Although gay marriage on the federal level was legalized on June 26, 2015, people still have not come to accept it. Individuals from the opposing argument will come up with many reasons why gay marriage shouldn't be legal. The main argument made by individuals of the opposing argument is, gay marriage goes against the Bible and other religions worldwide. They believe that same-sex marriage violates the natural moral order and offends God. The evidence used by the opposing side to show that same-sex marriage violates natural law is Genesis 1:28-29 which states, "God created man in His image; in the Divine image he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them, saying: 'Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it" (New King James Version, Gen. 1:28-29). Looking at this quote, Christians believe that anyone apart of the homosexual or LGBT community is offending God. However, these same Christians believe that God made everyone equal and loves everyone the same way. So why is it that individuals of the LGBT community are not accepted by many Christians and other religions around the world?

Secondly, individuals that stand by the opposing side of the argument try and argue that a child needs a mother and a father. They believe that children who are raised in a homosexual family will not be nurtured and loved the same way as if they were raised in a heterosexual family. However, both of these beliefs are incorrect because according to Susan Milligan from US News, a child can be raised by either two men or two women. In Milligans article, she also discusses how children raised in a homosexual family will be raised the same way as a child in a heterosexual family; as long as the right amount of love and support are provided. Children raised by homosexual parents will also learn to be more accepting than a child raised by heterosexual parents. This is because parents that are homosexuals know what it is like to be discriminated against, so they teach their child to love and accept everyone no matter their orientation (Milligan). According to sociologist Stacey Judith, kids from same-sex couples, both adopted and biological, fare no worse than kids from straight couples on social functioning, school performance, mental health and a variety of other life-success measures (Judith). Also in this article, Stacey states , "There's no doubt whatsoever from the research that children with two lesbian parents are growing up to be just as well-adjusted and successful as children with a male and a female parent" (Judith). Looking at this quote, it is evident that homosexuals are fit to nurture and provide for their child and do just as good of a job as heterosexual parents. In an article written by Cindy Coan, she states, "There is an estimated ten million children living with gay, lesbian, or bisexual parents or couples" (Coan, 699). After reading this quote, it is apparent that it is not abnormal for children to be living/having parents from the LGBT community. 

Although gay marriage was legalized on a federal level in 2015, the LGBT community is still fighting for equality around the world. One place that the LGBT community is looking for equality is in the workplace. In the United States, it is legal for a company or employer to fire or not hire someone based on his or her sexual orientation. Although there are some federal recourse through civil rights and equal employment claims, there's no national anti-discrimination law to protect the LGBT workers from state discrimination (Stone). Discrimination against the LGBT community in the workplace has begun to take the national spotlight due to the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision on June 26, 2015.  Workplace discrimination against the LGBT community is detrimental and should be unlawful. Not only does an LGBT member experience lower wages, they also are less likely to receive a promotion when running up against other applicants that are not a part of the LGBT community (Isaacs). According to the Center for American Progress, 10-28 percent of the LGBT community receive negative performance evaluations or were passed over for a promotion because of their sexual orientation. Along with those numbers, it is also proven that 8-17 percent of gay and transgender workers report being passed over or fired from a job due to their gender orientation (Burns). These numbers are proof that discrimination in the workplace is violating the equality rights of those that are a part of the LGBT community. 

Additionally, to help show discrimination in the workplace, Susan Milligan ran a test/experiment using four men: two homosexuals and two heterosexuals. The purpose of her experiment was to send all four men into an interview and see which two were hired. With this in mind, she randomly selected two LGBT members and two heterosexuals that were graduating from UGA (University of Georgia). The only difference between the two heterosexuals and the two homosexuals was that the homosexuals had more experience and better resumes. On the resumes of the two homosexuals, their sexual orientation was noted for the employer to see. After all four interviews had been completed, the two homosexuals were without a job and the two heterosexuals received the two positions that were open. The only reasonable explanation for this employer's decision was sexual orientation because the two homosexuals had better resumes than those of the two heterosexuals. The main point of this experiment was to show that professional discrimination is still prevalent and employers will choose those that are not a part of the LGBT community even though they are less qualified (Milligan). 

Furthermore, another example of discrimination in the workforce would be the passing of the House Bill 2 also known as HB2. The HB2 bill has reached the national level because it is a smack in the face to the LGBT community. This bill states that people must use the public bathrooms and changing facilities based on the "biological sex" that is stated on their birth certificates. Although this may not directly affect all of the LGBT community, it directly affects transgender individuals. This bill not only states that individuals must go to the bathroom, according to their "biological sex," but it also has other hidden stipulations. The HB2 bill allows businesses to base whether they want to help an LGBT individual, whether it is hiring a member or serving a member, off of their religion. According to this article, the HB2 still lacks legal protections for LGBT individuals and "explicitly targets transgender individuals by forcing them to use the wrong bathroom" (Tan). Although this bill is based in Charlotte, NC, it still has the right to pass non-discrimination legislation to the state government, stating that state laws preempt any local ordinances. Sarah Preston, acting executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, states, "Rather than expand nondiscrimination laws to protect all North Carolinians, the General Assembly instead spent $42,000 to rush through an extreme bill that undoes all local nondiscrimination laws and specifically excludes gay and transgender people from legal protections" (Tan). Not only was this bill rushed through, it is also seen as undemocratic. It violates the rights of all LGBT members, especially those that are transgender. It violates equality laws that include not only lesbians, gays, and bisexuals, but also Transgenders. Jennifer Roberts, the Mayor of Charlotte, states, "This legislation is literally the most anti-LGBT legislation in the country" (Kopan). This bill crossed over discrimination and was ratified out of pure hatred towards transgender individuals and LGB individuals. 

In addition, the other major place that the LGBT community is seeking equality is in the healthcare system. Although many people are vulnerable when ill and trying to receive health care, this vulnerability for lesbians, gays, bisexuals and Transgenders is often exacerbated by disrespectful attitudes, inflexible policies, discriminatory treatment and sometimes refusal of essential care. This is a major issue among the LGBT community because homosexuals do not receive the same benefits or treatment in the healthcare setting. LGBT members face a number of challenges when trying to access health care. Some examples of these challenges include: gaps in insurance, trying to obtain insurance coverage, cost related hurdles and poor treatment from healthcare professionals (Kates). For example, a recent survey was done that involved a number of LGBT individuals. During this survey, it was found that one in three LGBT members with incomes lower than 400% FPL (Federal Poverty Level) was uninsured, a group that could qualify for assistance under the ACA but are denied (Kates). The denial of health care is detrimental to the LGBT community because it tends to correspond to a rise in diseases due to the lack of treatment provided. In an article written by Kristin Magaldi, she writes about a survey that was published in the journal of Health and Social Work. According to the journal of Health and Social Work, 42 percent of male and female LGBT members have reported that they have been confronted with verbal harassment, physical assault, or denial of treatment altogether at hospitals and doctors' offices (Magaldi). How would the individuals causing this discrimination feel if the tables were turned? When the discrimination/harassment begins to harm an LGBT member, it has crossed a line and consequences should be enforced. 

To further show the discrimination of the LGBT community in healthcare, Lambda Legal (organization that is committed to achieving full recognition of civil rights for the LGBT community) and 100 other partner organizations issued a survey to 4,916 participants. The participants were not chosen by a random sample, but chosen to take the survey. Through the survey, Lambda Legal and the other organizations learned that almost 10 percent of the LGBT respondents reported that health care professionals used harsh language towards them; 11 percent reported that health professionals refused to touch them or used excessive precautions; and more than 12 percent of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community reported being blamed for their health status (Hirshman, 6-9). Looking at these results, it is evident that this is inhumane and a violation of any individual's rights. This data is extremely useful due to the diversity of the individuals that participated in the survey. The participants that completed the survey were extremely diverse with respect to sexual orientation, race, age, culture and gender identity, which caused the data to not be biased towards one person. 

Although the majority of the LGBT discrimination is portrayed in the workplace and health care facilities, LGBT members face discrimination while trying to accomplish everyday tasks. An example of this would be an LGBT member or couple trying to purchase a house or rent an apartment. This would be due to the landlords or property manager being anti-gay or homophobic (irrational fear of homosexuals). According to the Michigan Fair Housing Commission's study, it is found that a substantial amount of individuals have experienced discrimination when trying to buy/rent a house due to their sexual orientation. It was found that thirty percent of same sex couples were treated negatively when trying to buy a house. Not only were same-sex couples treated with disrespect, they were also shown less desirable properties, along with higher rental prices, received less favorable customer service, or faced an outright refusal to sell the property (Burns).  Along with not being able to buy/rent property, LGBT individuals may experience an outright refusal of services while trying to access a host in public places such as: restaurants, hotels, museums, libraries and a countless number of other places due to their sexual orientation. 

Lastly, discrimination against the LGBT community is unnecessary and can be prevented. There are countless steps that companies, businesses, hospitals and doctors' offices can enact that will minimize the discrimination directed towards the LGBT community in these facilities. Some examples of steps that can be implemented in healthcare facilities are: require health professionals to complete cultural proficiency training on gender identity/expression, along with sexual orientation. Another way that health care facilities can minimize discrimination against the LGBT community is by advocating for laws and accreditation that require all providers to perform/provide the same level of health care to an LGBT individual as they would an individual that is not in the LGBT community. Healthcare institutions can inaugurate nondiscrimination policies that prohibit bias and discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation (Calfas). Along with health care facilities taking steps to minimize discrimination, there are numerous steps that the workplace can take to decrease discrimination. For example, businesses and companies can advocate for improved policies and laws, along with fighting back against discrimination and filing reports when LGBT discrimination is noticed (Pappas). If businesses along with health care facilities took the time to implement anti-discriminatory laws, the amount of LGBT discrimination would come to an all-time low. 

Overall, it is evident that gay marriage can be an immense controversial topic throughout society. On one hand individuals, believe that gay marriage is unacceptable due to the effects on the kids and their upbringing, along with it going against their religious beliefs. On the other hand, gay marriage should be legal and accepted by everyone because individuals of the LGBT community deserve to have the same rights as those that are not in the LGBT community. Based on the evidence presented in the paper, it is apparent that LGBT discrimination in the workplace, healthcare facilities, and in everyday society should be prohibited.  

