Same-sex marriages

IntroductionSame elicit jointures involves coming together of a two spate of the kindred gender to go a family. These wedlocks atomic number 18 non recognized in most countries in the world. In the U.S, plainly the states of Iowa and Massachusetts al unkept joyous marriages. The state Vermont recognizes civil unions, which ar similar yet lesser than marriages. Civil unions do non justify the couples full disciplines enjoyed in marriages. The Federal Government, under the falsifying of sexual union Act of 1996, does not recognize said(prenominal) sex marriages but leaves individual states the room to regard on acceptable forms mirthful unions. (Strasser, Mark, 199414)Gay batch afford stepped up to campaigns for recognition of homogeneous sex marriages. sequence man flock accommodate been granted passable rights in m every fields in keep such as employment, they be denied the right to marriage. A complex argument has come up prop cardinalnts of kindred sex marriages on one side and opponents on the new(prenominal) each presenting their points. (Vesterman, W, 19942) The important controversy has been the definition of marriage. Gay passel want the right to connect, take for granted and raise children. legalisation of aforesaid(prenominal)-sex marriages would hold in an impact on all human perspectives. Businesses would accord employees from homo marriages like treatment. There would be social realignment and allocation of lineament in auberge. Religious bodies, more so Christians and Muslims haul the anti- homophile marriages campaign.Thesis statementSame-sex marriages should not be deoutlawd.Arguments for Same-sex marriages go a move onst nature. Marriage is meant to be a union of one man and one woman. It is an abnormality to develop feelings to a person of the aforementioned(prenominal) gender. People are innate(p) male and womanly to compliment each other in marriage. It is only by choice and exposure to gay ten dencies that they charter gay. Gay tendencies are not exhibited by any other form of life so as to suggest its is a natural phenomenon. Animals, scour the juxtaposed primates, do not display gay style. To legalize a marriage founded on an unnatural behavior would distort the notion of marriage, as we know it.Same-sex unions are not fit to raise children in. The parents relationship is not favourable to raising children in a ripe vogue. Children raised in these unions would be predisposed to gay behaviour. They would not be given a recover to live normal lives. Children grow up larn by means of copying parental actions, as they are not mature enough to make informed decision. Legalizing such a marriage would be exposing espouse children to unnatural acts.(Patterson, Charlotte, 2001346)Legalizing same-sex marriages would predate to other anti-social behaviors. Just as gay individual would have succeeded in legalizing their cause, others would to a fault come break and de mand their rights. It may lead to a rise in incest and go aroundiality. These individuals would invariably bring back back on to the case of the same-sex marriage to represent out their point. Polygamists would also demand recognition by law. It would to lead to absurdities such as an individual get in into to a union with an animal and demanding legal recognition. He or she would use the same arguments pushed by pro-gay marriages activists today.The marriage institution has an essential role of procreation. This role is best performed in a marriage. Same-sex marriages by design miss the capacity to procreate. Without the ability to perform this role, the marriage would be incomplete. Without procreation, humankind would not regenerate itself. The fact that gay marriage proponents are mainly in nations with low birth rates is worrying. Legalizing same-sex marriage would be set perpetuity of man in jeopardy in the long run.Legalizing gay marriages would be tantamount to han dsome gay people favored status. Gays want their issues to be treated in the same way as those of the disabled and the chronically ill. They however do not want to be treated the same way as pedophiles, masochists or even cannibals. These are people who choose to be the way they are and so do not merit special status. In their pleas for favored states, they use words laden with emotions to gain sympathy such as discrimination, homophobia and tolerance.Traditionally and morally, marriage is a man and woman affairs. As a connection we cannot neglect the traditions and morals that have always steer us and maintained assign. The society does not have to be immoral to advance. Legalizing same-sex marriages will tear the textile that holds society together. It will create a awareness of disorder and loss of direction for men. This social order must be closely guarded.(www.cnn.com)Legalizing same-sex marriage would be great experimentation with such as naked as a jaybird matter. The same sex marriage euphoria is the westernmost might have dangerous results since it has no been act before. Since same-sex relationships have gained prominence in the last twenty dollar bill years, their long-term effects cannot be projected. This euphoria has been render by political correctedness that makes people approve even the most absurd ideas.Arguments Against.Failure to legalize same-sex marriages will be abnegation of individuals their fundamental right. It would be tantamount to administration intrusion into ones private life. The government should not closing consenting adults from marriage whether gay or heterosexual. comparability should be seen to prevail. Just as the government keeps saturnine from straight marriages, it should also keep off the same sex marriages.(Scott, Bidstrup, 2004)Not legalizing same-sex marriages would be falling victim to stereotypes. forthwith people see gay people as baseless and non-committal. Straight people are prejudiced not b ecause, homosexuality is necessary bad, but because they are uncomfortable with it. They are afraid of any tilts in society regardless of their impact.Continued incrimination of same-sex marriage is payable to religious overstepping their mandates. The church oversteps its mandate by oblige its policies on the nation. There is little difference mingled with the church and the state. Politicians join the churchs cross to gain political support in form conservative churchgoers.Majority in society have always oppressed the minority. What is now being seen in the same sex marriage issue was experienced in slavery period. Religious bodies and groups who supported and even act in slavery and subsequent segregation have no moral grounds to criticize same-sex marriages.Proponents of same sex marriages ask that legalization would in fact strengthen the institution of marriage. Divorce rate would go down because gay people would not be forced into unions with people of the opposite gen der. Gay people may try to conform to societal norms and marry the opposite gender. They end-up in unhappy unions that lead to divorce. Legalization would also reduce stress related problems such as suicide and depression due to denial of right to be legally married.Proponents of same-sex marriages also argued that gay marriages have capacity to bring up children in the normal way. They point-out that what a child needs is not heterosexual parents but tender care and nurturing. They argue that same-sex couples can provide that care just like straight parents.Pro-gay marriage groups insist that gay people are born rather than choosing to be gay. They select that they are born with gay tendencies inherent. They point out that nobody would choose to be ridiculed and victimized through out their life. If it were something they would control they would just opt for the easier plectrum of heterosexuality. Criminalizing same-sex marriages would be failure to recognize the predicament ap proach gay people.(Pinello, Daniel, R, 2006 76)Conclusion.Same-sex marriages should not be legalized under any circumstance. It is a social evil that should not infiltrate into society. The government should look into the interests or the society and criminalize same-sex marriages. It should not fall for emotional talk more or less discrimination and homophobia. The usage of homophobia tires the portray those opposed to gay marriages as suffering from a mental condition. (Patterson, Charlotte, 2001 )The society should resist any attempts to portray same-sex marriage as normal and natural. It is not evident in other forms of life. The claim that gay people are born is also a fallacy. They are people who have reformed their gay tendencies showing that it is really a choice. Homosexuality cannot be determined by scientific inquiry of the DNA. All forms of consented sex and unions are voluntary.The marriages institutions cannot be strengthen by undermining its main foundations. Same-s ex marriages disrupt the main principle of marriage. Same-sex couples are not able to affirm proper care for kids. Such a marriage is unstable and do not provide the right environment for raising children.We should not embrace change just for the sake of change. Restructuring the age-old basic whole of society would be a historical mistake. The US should set precedence in protecting this all-important institution.ReferencesPinello, Daniel R., Americas Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage. Cambridge University Press, 2006 76.Strasser, Mark, The Challenge of Same-Sex Marriage Federalist Principles and Constitutional Protections. Praeger, 1999 14Patterson, Charlotte J., Same-Sex Marriage and the Interests of Children, Virginia Journal of Social Policy & Law, 9346. 2001Vesterman W. variation and Writing Short Arguments. London Mayfield, 1994 p2, 4.CNN News, Politics supply Calls For Ban on Same Sex Marriage, 05/02/2004. Retrieved on 10/10/07 from http//www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/24/el ec04.prez.bush.marriage/Scott Bidstrup. Gay Marriages The Arguments and The Motives, 2004. Retrieved on 10/10/07 from http//www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm