Should Gay Marriage Be Legalized?
Marriage is one of the most celebrated developments of a person’s life. Majority of the people are taking marriage as a goal in life since having a family is the most fulfilling role in this world. According to Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary, marriage is the time of being united to an individual of the opposite sex as wife and husband within in consensual and contractual relationship which is recognized by legal means (“Marriage” 1). Marriage is a legal and social institution which covers the union of both male and female who voluntarily accept each other as husband or wife and build a family of their own. Marriage of both male and female is a legal and social institution that leads to one unit make-up which is the family as part of the society. Hence, the family is the smallest unit in the society that we belong.
Although marriage is regarded as an essential institution in the society, it has been a subject of controversy due to suggestion on its modification which is referred to as same-sex marriage. In that case, some groups or sectors in the society suggested that both females and or males as partners may enter into the covenant of marriage just like the union of both male and female. In this paper, the topic is focused on the question: should gay marriage be legalized? It is strongly submitted in this paper that gay marriage should be legalized in order to give meaning to the principles of equality, liberty and freedom that has been the spirit of the United States’ Constitution. Spiritual matters and conservative ideas may oppose the legalization of gay marriage, what is primordial is that the freedom to choose what is right and wrong has been accorded to all human beings. Thus, conflicting ideas on matters pertaining to the legalization of gay marriage must be weighed down in the most equitable manner.
Essentially, there are three major arguments that support the position that gay marriage should be legalized and these include respect on individual rights, non-interference of the church in governance and respect on the ability of gays to raise a family. The basic opposition on these arguments is that gay marriage can destroy the sanctity of marriage and mock the importance of procreation.
The Proposition on Gay Marriage
For the first argument, gay marriage should be legalized because gays have the rights to exercise and acquire liberty, freedom, and equality accorded in the fundamental law of the land and in the absence of damage or injury towards other people. While it is true that gay marriage is outlawed in many parts of the United States, there are still government leaders in a few states that was able to successfully legalized gay marriages. The reason behind this fact is that people who believe on the principle of equality are increasing and that gays are humans too and not circus animals. It is easy for the people to speak about equality like equal rights for homosexuals such that they should be given the same rights in housing, jobs, government benefits access, accommodations in public, and equal protection of the law, but when gay marriage is mentioned, there is an end of discussion (Bidstrup 1). Gay marriage is a less relevant topic that minimal discussion of the same is given thereby neglecting the needs of a few gay individuals. However, negligence in looking into the society deeply might be the reason why many families suffer from marital problems.
Gays should be given a chance to express their feelings towards another man because they are humans too. Love is a strong affection for or attachment or devotion to a person or persons (Fabella & de Angel 16). Love is compared to a prism that has number of sides through which a spectrum of beautiful colors is refracted. Love is the basic reason why individuals marry each other. Love is wonderful and as such, all people are free to express the same. And what makes a person think that only individuals who are both male and female have the chance to love? It is a selfish act to confine expression of love within a male-female relationship when gays are also entitled to do so when the law can be adjusted in its favor.
People are raising this question: should gay marriage be legalized? This question arises because it is true that gay marriage is considered as not socially acceptable. People do not think that gay people should have the right to get married. They think that gays should be happy with the rights that are already given to them. But the public must be aware that gays are loyal to their mates and are monogamous being devoted partners (Bidstrup 1). In other words, it is not true that gays are promiscuous and are not able to form and build long lasting relationships.
In addition, gays are also capable of building a family if ever married to another gay. Gays value family relationships and takes part in family activities as family life is a reflection of their uniqueness as human beings (Bidstrup 1). Besides, gays honor and abide by the laws of the land just like other people in the society. The ability of gays to promote peace and self-reliance is noticeable and there is no reason that they could not perform the basic responsibilities to build a family.
Moreover, there are countries outside the United States that legalized same-sex marriage for the reason that gays should be given equal rights as human beings. In the year 1993, Denmark legalized same-sex marriage while Israel did the same the next year (Mathews 1). In the year 1995, Sweden followed suit (Mathews 1). There is also an intensified debate about same sex unions in the United States for the past three years. Pro-gay advocates exist within the United States and it was their position that gay marriage should be allowed so as not to commit miscarriage of civil liberties (Mathews 1). The disadvantage of preventing gay marriage to happen includes heartbreaking situations like disallowance to visit one another during illness and emergency situations.
Gay marriage should be legalized so that a gay partner can have the same right in terms of adoption and medical rights. Adoption is the primary option given by gays with respect to their inability to procreate children (Johnson 1). Adoption is basically given as a right to married couples who want to expand the membership of their families. Since the absence of same sex marriage disallows gays to adopt a child, it would be a difficult situation for them to be denied a chance to care and love adopted children (Crumley 1). We are aware that gays are also capable of nurturing children and the fact that there are gays who chose to marry a girl, taking care of an offspring is normal for them (Belge 2). So then, is it not selfish to allow gays to adopt children and be legally married to their loved ones? I know that it is our responsibility to ponder on these things and support the legalization of gay marriage. If not, we will surely fall prey to ignorance and negligence as we continue limit our understanding on what has been considered as usual and normal activities in the community where we live.
Furthermore, the United States is the land of the free. It is a mockery to the spirit of the Constitution when limits to the right to marry would be continuously followed. The chance to be happy must be accorded to everyone if a wise interpretation of the fundamental law of the land is to be made. An option to marry and be a permanent partner to a gay individual must be accorded to everyone no matter what the gender may be. It is useless to preach on equality and unconditional love when its expression is limited only to the majority. How about the gay couples? They are not male and females who entered into a wonderful relationship but they too knows how to love unconditionally.
The redefinition of marriage is relevant nowadays (Stewart 1). The willingness of gays to have their own family makes it imperative for government leaders to re-define marriage that is more focused on opposite sex relationships (“The Redefinition of Marriage”). We often overlook the best asset of our country, the willingness of a minority group or people to build and integrate family relationships which is essential to peace and harmony (“Marriage”). Is it not a problem that there are many families that are considered dysfunctional? These families have parents that male or female and children that are procreated by them. Why not give chances to gays who can adopt and care for a child? It is just a matter of open-mindedness and tolerance, after all the basic purpose of living life is to find happiness hence, the pursuit for happiness. The family as a basic unit of society must include gay couples since we live in the land of the free. The essence of living freely is not finding anyone unable to express love and devotion to a marital partner despite the absence of damage or injury to other people. If freedom and liberty is too expensive, then how can we afford to live in a democratic country? Well, gay marriage must be legalized for all we know it could be an ingredient for a progressive and peaceful country.
In addition, religion and the churches should not interfere with the government with respect to options in legalizing gay marriage. It is usual that when gay marriage is a topic, legal concerns would come into the surface. However, we should realize that religious concerns also affect the choice of legalizing gay marriages (Mags 1). While it is true that the three major religions in the world involving Islam, Judaism and Christianity have been opposed to same sex union, it is also acceptable a present time that many religious people no longer follow the traditional beliefs against same sex marriage. It is a surprise that the Jews, as well as some Christian nations support gay marriage (Mags 1). In essence, the traditional religious views on same sex union are becoming weaker as more people opened their eyes to the advantages of gay marriage (Mags 1). Therefore, religious views against same sex marriage no longer holds true today for people who think twice about the necessity of gay marriage.
According to proponents of same sex marriage, they already debunked the scriptural arguments on marriage such that they believe that it was misunderstood and taken out of context. Remember that there are religious people who pointed out that procreation or human propagation is an essential responsibility for families, but the same is no longer the case when overpopulation caused the myriad problems in the society (“Religion and Gay Marriage”). It is acceptable that gays should be given the right to get married with another gay and at the same time prevent overpopulation as they cannot bear children. With that, twin matters are met, the promotion of equality and the avoidance of overpopulation. The move to promote conceptive measures rendered nugatory and useless the belief that families should multiply here on earth.
The Opposition on Gay Marriage
However, there are opponents of gay marriage who provided strong arguments regarding the promiscuousness of same sex union. The primary reason why gay marriage is not acceptable is religious belief. According to Packer, homosexual activity is a serious sin before the eyes of God (Packer 303). There is only a man and woman created by God, thus having a gender called gay and lesbian is not acceptable by religious standards. The same is true with the marriage of two men or two women; it was never the intention of God to let that union happen here on earth (“Same Sex Marriage”). Marriage is designed for procreation which involves having children in the family. How can gay couple have their own children? The answer may be adoption, but the Biblical instruction is to be fruitful and multiply.
It is becoming obvious that churches are more involve of issues that come before the legislature and the electorate. The logic behind that is the protection of morality of which Churches believe to be important in religious responsibility. Morality is an issue that has been bombarded by many people since it can destroy their freedom to express feelings and emotions. Morality talks about a system of behavior with respect to standards of right or incorrect behavior (“Morality by Design”). In relation to gay marriage, it is immoral to marry a person that belongs to the same sex. What is moral and proper is to marry a person that belongs to the opposite sex to give value to the Biblical passage that man and woman must fill the earth with people through the power of procreation (“Same Sex Marriage”). In connection, there are issues in the legislature that calls for identification of whether such issue is under ethical standards or morality or on civil rights. Unfortunately, people view same sex marriage as a civil rights issue which churches want to correct, for it was never a civil rights issue but on morality of men. Therefore, it is not right to condemn the right of religious people to tackle issues and defend their side for doctrines and principles they preach and practice.
Those forces that undermine the moral fiber of the society are being fought against by religious people. These forces include the presence of gays and lesbians alike in the society. But since these people are also humans, churches invited them to repent of their wrong behavior and encourage them to change. Gay marriage undermines the social fiber of the society and if it is continued as an advocacy, numerous people would be attracted to its enticing words. What will happen to the youth which is the hope of our country? Their character and morality would bend in favor of immoral acts and standards because we failed to prepare them and mold their character to become better persons.
There are also many religious people who supported different groups that opposed issues related to morality and redefinition of marriage. Activists exist within the United States who believes that the welfare of the children is the basic concern against same sex marriage (“McKinley 1). Gay marriage is one issue wherein many religious people rally behind powerful interest groups just to prevent any gay marriage legalization. This means that many people are also becoming more concerned of the future and make sure that the strength of morality is being assured whatever the situation may be. Religious organizations like Christians, Muslims and the Buddhists play a big role in keeping the sanctity of marriage intact in these days that temptations loom in every corner. Therefore, gay marriage can destroy the sanctity of marriage and must be eliminated in the society.
Again, same sex marriage is not a civil right at all. It is a matter of morality as opposed to negligence of protecting the moral fiber of society. The people should not question the constitutional rights of churches to raise issues and concerns that matters most to their patrons. Remember that it is also the right of religious people to voice out their opinions. It is then the belief of religious organizations and its members who are against gay marriage that defending the sanctity of marriage through working to preserve traditional marriage lies clearly within religious and constitutional prerogatives. Hence, we cannot blame churches why its members tried hard to oppose gay marriage that might destroy the faith that they gave to God.
It is not true that churches condemn the presence of gays and lesbians (Zoll 1). Religious people are simply compelled to speak out due to the principles and doctrines that they believed. Aside from that, the move of religious people to oppose same sex marriage should not be interpreted as justification for hatred, intolerance, or abuse of those who believe in homosexuality, either as a group or individually (Packer 303). What religious people do not like is gay marriage and not the presence of homosexuals. Hence, these religious individuals do not condemn those who are lesbians and gays but only oppose the activities that might destroy the sacredness of marriage. The most active religious group that is against same sex marriage is the Catholic Church. The said church considers homosexuality as a sin and a disorder before the sight of God (Zoll 1). The Catholic Church has its own share of issues involving presence of gays in the church, but its efforts in correcting the same is evident on its move to change the status quo.
It is also argued that the only legitimate employment of the powers of procreation is between husband and wife who have been legally and lawfully married to each other (Packer 303). Gay marriage carries with it issues that also offend the doctrines and beliefs of churches like the sacredness of marriage between husband and wife. The power to bear and have children is given only to husband and wife and it is impossible for gay couples to do so. Therefore, gay marriage is not acceptable before the eyes of God no matter what the gay marriage advocates say. While it is true that no religious organization be compelled to celebrate same sex marriage whenever a state legalizes the same, it is also correct to say that when this happens there would be an eventual destruction of the moral standards that a few people already have (Park 1).
Gay marriage can also cause alteration on life’s activities. It is a fact that there are states that already legalized gay marriage. In states where gay marriage is not legalized, gay couples transfer to states where gay marriage is legalized, leaving their families behind, their jobs, their responsibilities and their dreams. Gay couple who wanted to have their own child would like to adopt, but there are restrictions on them to do so (“Gay Adoption Debate and Poll”). The right to adopt is only given to married husband and wife who can prove that they can rear the adopted child. If gay couple cannot adopt because legal infirmities exists, then it could cause so much pain and frustration on their part. That situation can be prevented if teaching them moral standards would be prioritized. There are also many gays in the United States who are focused on fighting for their rights and they become activists for that matter. It could be better that they stay in their homes to practice good moral standards and work in their offices to achieve economic development instead of fighting for gay marriage that is not right from the beginning.
On the other hand, gay marriage also deprives a child to have a mother and a father. It is the basic need of a child to be loved and cared by parents who are called father and mother. Gay couples cannot replace the love and care that can be given by husband and wife (Sorensen 1). Young children who are born in the midst of these controversies that may affect them are so pitiful. This is because when voting for the legalization of gay marriage, they do not have the chance to voice out their sides since their age cannot permit them to do so. We should remember that the combined efforts and peculiar characteristics of a father and a mother are necessary for a child’s physical, emotional, psychological and spiritual full development (Sorensen 1). Therefore, gay marriage is not pro-children and it will just deny them to grow a better individuals.
Finally, the legalization of same sex union is a threat to religious liberty in the United States (Paulson 1). In fact, there are many local churchgoers who opposed the legalization of same sex union specifically gay marriage. There is undying move to preserve traditional marriage in the country. It is the argument of churchgoers that children must be raised in a home that there is a father and a mother.
Gay marriage is an issue that knocks on the doors of those who are concerned of the welfare of the country. We may be divided in its position; our voices must wield for the best results and not based on bias and influence. We should participate in voting for or against gay marriage so that majority decision can be taken.
Others claim that the issue on gay marriage is a civil rights issue, while religious groups claim that it is a morality issue. With that, there are three major arguments to support gay marriage and these are respect on individual rights, non-interference of the church in governance and respect on the ability of gays to raise a family. On the opposition side, the basic argument is that gay marriage destroys the sanctity of marriage between husband and wife. The major concern is whether or not redefinition of traditional marriage is proper. Whatever may be the answers of this question, the primary consideration must be the welfare of the majority in order to achieve peace and harmony.
Finally, gay marriage is an issue that may affect us all. It is our responsibility to decide on the necessity of gay marriage in order to take part in having a progressive country. Both sides of the gay marriage issue deserve respect and freedom to hear argument. Yet, it is necessary that only the best judgment should be made in order to protect the existence of humanity.
Belge, Kathy. 2008. About.com. Lesbian and Gay Adoption Rights. January 15, 2009
< http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/families/a/adoption.htm >
Bidstrup, Scott. 2004. Gay Marriage: The Arguments and the Motives. January 15, 2009
< http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm. >.
Crumley, Bruce. 24 January 2008. Time.com. France Overruled on Gay Adoption. January 15, 2009 < http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1706514,
Fabella, Armand & de Angel, Aldenia. The Best of Love, Courtship and Marriage. Manila: Publishing House, 2002.
Gay Adoption Debate and Poll”. 2008. You Debate Website. January 16, 2009
< http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/gay_adoption.HTM >.
Johnson, Ramon. 5 November 2008. About.com. Where Is Gay Adoption Legal? January 15, 2008 < http://gaylife.about.com/od/gayparentingadoption/a/
Mags, Jan. 8 May 2007. Socyberty Website. Religion and Same Sex Marriage. January
15, 2009 < http://www.socyberty.com/Gay-&-Lesbians/Religion-and-Same
“Marriage”. 2008. Merriam Webster’s Online Dictionary. January 15, 2009
“Marriage”. 2008. Farlex Encyclopedia. January 15, 2009 < http://encyclopedia.
Mathews, Michael. 24 August 2006. Should Same Sex Marriage Be Legal? January 15, 2009 < http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/53910/should_same_sex_
McKinley, Jesse. 9 December 2008. New York Times. Gay Marriage Ban Inspires New of Activists. January 16, 2009 < http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/
Packer, Boyd. Eternal Marriage. United States: Intellectual Reserve, Inc., 2003.
Park, James. 2003. University of Minnesota. Same Sex Marriage-First Books. January 16, 2009 < http://www.tc.umn.edu/~parkx032/B-SSMARR.html >.
Paulson, Michael. 2006. Globe Newspaper Company. Group to rally opposition to gay marriage. January 16, 2009 < http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles
“Religion and Gay Marriage”. 30 October 2008. Rainy Day Thought. January 15, 2009
“Same Sex Marriage”. 22 August 2003. PBS Website. January 16, 2009
< http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week651/cover.html >.
Stewart, Niel. 2006. Man Woman Marriage. Judicial Redefinition of Marriage. January 15, 2008 < http://www.manwomanmarriage.org/jrm/ >.
Sorensen, Paul. 8 October 2008. Independent Website. Yes on Proposition 8: Gay Marriage Deprives Some Children of a Mom and a Dad. January 16, 2009
< http://www.independent.com/news/2008/oct/08/yes-proposition-8-gay-marriage-deprives-some-child/ >.
“The Redefinition of Marriage”. November 2001. Toady’s Family News. January 15, 2009 < http://www.focusonthefamily.ca/tfn/sexuality/articles/Redefinition_
Zoll, Rachel. 25 May 2002. Boulder Daily Camera. Abuse scandal leads to church debate on homomsexuality. January 16, 2009 < http://www.boulderdailycamera.