In this country, each citizen is guaranteed the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, so long as it doesn’t intrude upon another citizen’s same right. Essentially, the U.S. government and the state governments beneath it are supposed to defend this right of each citizen and to create laws that act in that manner.

The legal denial of homosexual marriage infringes upon both the liberty and pursuit of happiness of homosexual citizens. Unfortunately, the all-powerful government is again failing to fulfill one of its principal duties to a relatively small percentage of the population — and without good reason.

The only logical argument against gay marriage seems to be that homosexuality is wrong, and most people feel this way because of a religious belief or simple disgust.

If one believes marriage must involve procreation, it’s fair to say that homosexuality is “wrong.” It is hard to argue with that biology. But favoring homosexual marriage doesn’t necessarily mean condoning homosexuality.

The Vatican view is that homosexual marriage is wrong, but homosexuals deserve respect and justice. I stray from this view because giving people a right to the financial and legal benefits of marriage is something that qualifies as both respect and justice. However, this does not mean I view homosexuality at the core any differently than the church does.

To illustrate some of these points, consider a fictional couple known as Jim and Mike. Jim and Mike’s relationship has lasted 30 years. They have lived together, traveled together and considered themselves dedicated to each other for life. Despite their dedication to each other, there are 1,138 benefits of marriage that Jim and Mike will never see, according to the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. General Accounting Office.

Jim and Mike both work to provide for each other. Come April, Jim and Mike cannot file a joint tax return on their household because they are not married. They are denied the opportunity for a tax break and various tax credits that are granted to married couples.

Jim has a job with great health care coverage. Mike works at a local department store that doesn’t offer the same benefits to its employees. Jim cannot put Mike on his health care plan because legally, Mike is not part of his “family.”

Mike falls ill, and Jim needs to take care of him. Jim is not legally entitled to 12 weeks of leave to care for Mike because they are not legally partners. At the hospital, Jim is not legally able to make medical decisions regarding Mike’s condition because they aren’t married.

Mike dies as a result of his illness. Jim cannot be Mike’s beneficiary and receive Mike’s social security, pension and other financial savings that Mike has acquired in his lifetime because the government doesn’t recognize their relationship.

When it comes down to it, some in government are discriminating against homosexuals based on a lifestyle choice. Some in government do not approve of the way homosexuals live their lives, so they deny those people the right to live their lives equally.

Homosexual marriage in no way infringes on anybody else’s life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. A citizen’s queasiness with homosexuality does not qualify as intrusion upon life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. No citizen has a right to be protected from “shocking” behavior unless it hurts him or her. A couple’s legal benefits of commitment do not impact the life of another citizen, the freedom of another citizen or a citizen’s ability to live happily.

Even without marriage rights, homosexuals are going to live their lives however they want to, whether the government or some citizens approve of it or not. Not allowing gay marriage is not preventing homosexuality from happening. Such legal interest in someone’s private life is wrong. The government is overstepping its boundaries in punishing those who live a homosexual lifestyle for the simple appeasement of those who just are not comfortable with the idea of being gay.

Those same people just cannot come to terms with letting homosexuals live a way that they don’t approve of. The manifestation of this is really just another example of government power gone wild. The law is supposed to defend inalienable rights, yet it restricts them instead. Let people live the life they choose, and save the judgment for a higher power.

Homosexuality and the quest for rights and privacy are a reality, like it or not. If you don’t approve of it, avoid it. Like every mother tells a child about bumble bees, “If you don’t bother them, they won’t bother you.”

Unfortunately for those opposed to gay marriage, the sting of reality is too much to bear.

— Oliver Casey is a junior in enterprise management. He can be reached at [email protected].