Custom «Same-Sexual Marriages» Essay Paper

Introduction

Same-sexual marriages have shaken the world recently. Many homosexuals from countries where these marriages are approved can finally feel happy that the equality has won again, and their rights are defended. Only since 2001, eleven countries (Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, Iceland, Argentina, South Africa, Spain, Norway, Portugal, Belgium, Sweden, including some parts of the United States and Mexico City) have started to allow same-sexual marriages. In Israel, Curacao, Aruba, Sint Maarten, and Uruguay the jurisdiction does not perform homosexual marriages but recognizes its performance elsewhere (Public Religion Research Institute, 2011). The recognition of such bonds has become a social, political, religious, and civil rights issue for many countries. Debates are continuing everywhere in the whole world showing two completely opposite points of view. Therefore, the aim of this research is to find out about all the cons and pros of the homosexual marriages, to understand all the underlying issues and to dissipate biased beliefs.

•  

  0

  Preparing Orders

•  

  0

  Active Writers

•  

  0%

  Positive Feedback

•  

  0

  Support Agents

 

Title of your paper

Type of service

Type of assignment

Number of pages

-

+

Academic level

Timeframes

Spacing

Currency

USD

• Total price

Continue to order

 

The performance of such marriages is either in a religious way (as many religious groups across the whole world already do: Liberal Jews, Unitarian Universalists, Episcopalians, and the Quakers) or a secular, civil ceremony.

Those people who have better education are more prone to recognize the legalization of same-sex marriages, according to the survey conducted in many countries. The same survey shows that younger generations are also more likely to accept it than the older ones. Moreover, people who happen to have homosexual friends or at least know such people, they usually support the marriage between the same sexes. Australia supports same-sex marriages only when at least one of the partners has undergone the therapy of gender reassignment (Langer Research, 2012).

Court documents filed by the American scientists aver that forbidding gay men and women to enter the marriage union greatly discriminates against them in public.

Some associations describe homosexual marriages as an issue of universal human rights, equality of all humans to do what they are naturally inclined to do if this does not cause harm to anyone. Writers who are ‘pro’ gay marriages call opposition ‘homophobic’ or ‘heterosexual’. They even correlate such marriage prohibitions to interracial marriage between whites and blacks. To end up this controversial discussion, let us have a closer look at all aspects of this issue.

Cons of Same-Sex Marriage

In many countries marriage is defined as a legal and religious commitment between a woman and a man and the strong expression of their love. In our country, homosexual relationships are gradually gaining more and more recognition; however, in most states, it is still forbidden for partners of one-sex couples to marry each other. Some states call such bonds ‘civil unions’, in order not to say ‘marriage’. According to the U.S. Constitution, if one state adopts the law which legalizes homosexual marriages, all other states must recognize it, as well. To defend this law, many cities, such as San Francisco, performed a series of gay and lesbian marriages (Messerli, 2011).

So what are these ‘con’-arguments which discriminate so many people across the Globe?

Most religions make the first against-point which regard homosexuality as a terrible sin. In fact, practically each religion in the whole world, including the main ones in the United States, finds homosexuality highly unacceptable. Religious people consider it to be particularly offensive as it destroys the freedom of practicing religion conducting what is sinful. The U.S. legal system has evolved from the Bible laws; that is why we should not break those laws in any way possible.

The second against-point states that respect and even the very definition of the institution of marriage are weakened. 50 % divorce rate has already changed the meaning of marriage for many people. Because of this, we should not take any more steps towards destroying this sanctified union. A constitutional law which permits same-sex marriages would only increase the number of non-serious marriages and jokes about it. Heterosexual marriages make biological sense, since only a woman and a man are able to procreate.

The number three ‘against’ is pretty similar to the second one, just broadened a little: the traditional values of the family would be weakened. The family has always been a union which has helped us to go through wars and depressions. With the raise of feminism and some other negative factors, family values have been shaken enough. Introduction of another type of ‘family’ would worsen the situation even more.

The next ‘con’ is ridiculously serious if this is possible at all. Fierce opponents of the homosexualism state that the legality of marriage would be destroyed. According to these people, men and women may think that it is allowed to have many wives or husbands, or even marry animals or their parents, and they will start fighting for such rights (Messerli, 2011).

The fifth against-point is quite strong, in my opinion. Homosexual marriages confuse children about their roles and what they can expect from the society – it is very difficult to show the importance of the traditional family to them when they go out and see that there are other ‘families’. Moreover, same-sex couples would like to adopt children and to raise a child in such a ‘family’ means to deprive him or her of the relationship with one or even two biological parents (Forman, 2011).

Some studies which have been conducted recently show that many problems, such as psychological disorders and lower life expectancy, are the causes of the gay lifestyle (Messerli, 2011). Therefore, homosexualism is a very bad habit in the society, just like drinking, smoking and using drugs; such lifestyles must not be encouraged in a decent society.

Pros of Same-Sex Marriage

I would offer you to do the following little experiment which I have done myself to find out how do people really react to the homosexual marriages. Ask any person what they think about homosexual relationship. I give 95 % or even more that you will hear positive replies and encouragement for the two people who have slightly different attraction than the majority of us. Then, you ask directly about the gay marriage; and here comes silence. Yes, homosexuals must have the same, equal rights, but marriage? Very few people would support such marriages, both in the United States and across its borders: too many stereotypes, misunderstandings and erroneous assumptions have been built around gay marriages and even traditional ones. However, let us find out about all the positive sides of same-sex unions.

The first ‘pro’ is that marriage benefits (property joint ownership, tax filing status, insurance benefits, etc.) have to be available for everyone (Cline, 2012).

Homosexuality has always existed and will exist, as this is the nature of some people’s psychology. They cannot change their way of thinking and desires without harming themselves psychologically and even physically. Why should they? No discrimination should exist in the democratic world where equality reins.

The third ‘pro’ is that same-sex marriages do not actually harm the society or anyone in it. This is just another form of relationship between two people – personal commitment, which is not one else’ business. If the church disapproves, it is its right; however, they do not have a single right to forbid it.

The only thing, which should matter when we talk about marriage, is love. No need to comment on it (Cline, 2012).

The fifth point is that it is very good that the number of adopted children will increase, as too many children waste their lives in orphanages or in the streets.

The last, but not least point is that the Constitution clearly protects any religious rights of all people. Marriage is considered by the state to be a secular activity. The government should not start adopting laws only because the religion says so (there are so many different religious beliefs, for example, those of the Satanist groups) as it may lead to even more domestic and international conflicts, when the opposite religious groups will start protesting against those laws.

Conclusions

 After having a closer look at the both sides of this burning subject, after weighing logically without any shade of prejudice and biased subjectivity each statement ‘against’ and ‘for’ the same-sex marriage, I can without a slight doubt state that we should learn to accept other people the way they are. If someone differs from us in their perception of the world, does it mean that we should point out our finger at them or go to the streets to shout our protests? I think, no. We must learn to be wiser and more tolerant and do not judge (actually, we must not judge other people at all) what we are ignorant about and what is based on false assumptions. Let us admit that the only thing, which really bothers us is that we are simply not comfortable with the thought of such marriages. Many years our society promoted homosexual unions to be ridiculous, but the government recognized their mistakes long ago as well as concerning other  serious cases, as well; especially discrimination against Afro-Americans for so many years. So why should we continue to stick to these erroneous beliefs? Cannot we finally get wiser and accept others the way we accept ourselves? If we want something, we can do everything – it is always up to us to choose whether to be biased or open and understanding.