Legalities aside, marriage serves as the greatest symbol of love and affection in our country. Glamorized by the media and Hollywood, it serves as something that all couples wish to attain and should be entitled to.

Feelings are genuine to oneself and those one wishes to share them with, and the fact that the government can impede on those emotions or feelings is unacceptable.

Since when can a democratic government choose what preference is more entitled than another?

For a moment, let us simplify preference down to a personal choice between flavors of ice cream. Preference is not subject to individual choice — a common argument  I would say is underdeveloped and often due to religious bias  in explaining the origins of one’s sexual orientation. No one chooses to like a certain taste of something; it’s something that is experienced or felt and then subsequently becomes second nature. Is it genetic or determined socially? No one ever asks, because it does not matter.

However, with homosexuality it matters so much. It would certainly be preposterous if there were legal bindings that said you were not allowed to buy a pint of vanilla ice cream and take it home. The same should hold true for wishing to marry someone of the same sex, whom you love — an emotion that is simply human. To love someone, to desire to live out one’s life with someone, can only be described as this. The fact that homosexuals have been torn down — not only in a purely discriminatory sense but more importantly as human beings as well — cannot go unrecognized or supported by any ruling system that does not make it a priority to grant something that should be an intrinsic right — the opportunity to marry.

-Joshua Sauceda, Sophomore, English