Although they are in love, and currently have the ability to exercise their right to date, if two people are not permitted to marry, it is plausible to say that they are being robbed of their God given liberties to pursue happiness. Their liberty is being oppressed, as there are laws as to who they can and cannot marry; and on top of that, their right to happiness is being oppressed, for they are only capable of loving the same sex. Since gay marriage is not legal everywhere, they are, ergo, being stigmatized. The chances of them finding true happiness, and being able to show it to the world, drop quite significantly. By denying gay couples the right to marry they suffer on personal legal levels. Primarily, being denied first hospital visitation rights, social security benefits, health insurance, and a significant amount of other things that heterosexual couples are entitled to when they are married. .
No matter how one may view it, denying gay couples marriage isn't' right, especially if the couple in question has history together and has been together for quite an extensive period of time. However, it is common that people argue that there are other ways for gay couples to be legally joined without "interfering with the sanctity of marriage and holy matrimony." This would be the process of the partnership in question partaking in a civil union. While this may be a way for the couple to be legally joined, it is more than accurate to say that a civil union hardly compares to the grandeur, extravagance and sense of accomplishment and love, that a couple is blessed enough to experience after they have been married. Comparing a civil union to a marriage is like comparing diamonds to rhinestones. Also, those who partake in civil unions involving the same sex unity are often forced to remain in the place where they were unionized, or should they decide to leave, move to a place that recognizes their union, like a state where gay marriage is tolerated, for example.