Argument for Gay marriages

Abstract

There have been heated debates over legalization of gay marriages in the society with varied opinions on its acceptance all over the world. Legal and social issues come into force when the debate of gay marriages is discussed. The parameter that gets a lot of attention when gay marriage is discussed is the legal issue because it entails issues to do with civil and basic equal rights.

It is argued that, even though gay marriage is not acceptable to many people, the choice of lifestyle should be respected. There is no tangible evidence though not a fact, that gay marriage has any harm in the society. Some researchers argue that there are good reasons to support legalization of gay marriage.

On the contrary, other scholars propose that legalizing same sex marriages will lead to enactment of more gay rights with time. Serious effects on religious beliefs and communities that oppose same sex marriages in the society may also be encouraged. Some of the laws that are likely to be enacted are those that will compel employers and landlords to hire and lease their property to homosexuals respectively.

Despite the differences in sex orientations, many people hold to their principles and characters in life. Sex and romance activities among individuals who practice monogamous relationships in same sex marriages have proven to do well in the society.

This has been impounded by the decline of sexually transmitted illnesses among couples practicing homosexuality. Children brought up in such families grow up to be stable emotionally and financially. This is due to the fact that rearing of children would not stop even if same sex unions become dominant.

This may be necessitated by adoption and inheritance of children. Through these unions, individuals are able to make long term plans for investment by making sacrifices for future benefits. For all the good reasons for supporting opposite sex marriages, the benefits are the same for same sex unions. This is due to the fact that same sex unions cannot lead to accidental kids, which result in an assumption that same sex marriage should be the most preferred.

Body

Enacting laws that recognize gay marriages would be beneficial to the society in the sense that it promotes equal rights among members of the society. Even though the law recognizes marriage, it should not be taken as a moral right but a sign of appreciation because it does not specify sexual orientation. Therefore, it follows that legalizing same sex marriages is a promotion of harmony in the society.

I would also argue that refusing to legalize gay marriages would not affect the perceptions of people about the act of homosexuality. This can adversely affect the livelihoods of people. In my opinion, gay marriage is not immoral, and the globe would be better placed if all people believe the same.

If discrimination on sexual orientation is persistently practiced, the situation would get worse and cases of abuse would grow rampantly. Therefore, continuous legal bias against gay marriage would contribute to harmful behaviors against other people in the community.

People who oppose gay marriage argue that the practice would adversely affect opposite sex marriages. I do not agree that allowing close to three percent of the population to practice homosexuality would have a harmful effect on the whole population. Making the practice legal would make some people who are heterosexuals shift towards homosexual practices.

There are some individuals who display both homosexual and heterosexual tendencies and are referred to as bisexuals. These groups of people would likely shift to one of the orientations if gay marriages are legalized given their interpretation of the law and the benefits that they would get from the constitution.

Enacting laws that legalize same sex marriages would have very little effect on the way things are carried in the society. As much as there is little to benefit from this practice, the benefits are almost insignificant to members of the society. It is obvious that there are benefits of giving preference to opposite sex marriages. Some people argue that engaging gay marriages encourages the risk of sexually transmitted diseases.

I would argue that just as the practice is the same with same sex marriages, there is a greater risk of sexually transmitted diseases in opposite sex marriages compared to gay unions. In the same manner that multiple relationships expose people to sexually transmitted diseases, the same applies to homosexuals who engage with multiple partners. Therefore, gay marriages cannot be merely dismissed on the basis that it propagates transmission of STDs.

From the ancient times, the practice of marriage has always meant the union between a man and a woman and has passed the times from one generation to another. Throughout all the civilizations and modernization that have been witnessed in the globe, polygamy has not been done away with and has remained to be a normal practice among many nations.

With all the civilizations that have been witnessed in history, same sex practices have merely been witnessed. There are worries that this practice would destabilize the longest practices of opposite sex marriages. There are numerous changes in the society that have been witnessed in the recent past including premature sex, divorce, and separation. Some people argue that these occurrences have contributed to a better society but on the other extreme, they have caused harmful effects in the society.

In the same manner that these changes intruded the society like premature sex and divorce, allowing gay marriages would not cause any harm to members of the society but would bring more good. A very small percentage of people would be affected and a state of stability would be promoted among individuals who practice it.

When gay marriages are discussed, most people conclude that the act between two individuals of the same gender is not a natural biological process. They argue this on the basis that the act does not lead to procreation.

If one was to consider that the union of marriage must lead to children, then there would be severe consequences for people who could not get children as a result of sterility or impotence. If it is compulsory that people must give birth to children in marriage, then one is left to wonder the reason for marriage of women who have aged beyond menopause.

This implies that it would be unfair to discriminate against impotent, sterile and aged people. Therefore, it follows people marry for important reasons that include getting children, individual commitment, religious identification, satisfaction and to meet the requirements of the law.

In addition, one cannot merely dismiss the idea of marriage on the basis of age, sterility or impotence clinging on the traditional concept that it is meant for procreation. Gay marriages should, therefore, be allowed irrespective of the reason for their union.

Another popular idea in the public domain is that legalizing gay marriage would endanger the institution of marriage. Majority of the people who are conservatives argue that the institution of marriage is the most important unit in the society.

In my opinion, to deny people from getting into unions is a strange rejection of their basic right. A few years ago, blacks were not allowed to marry the whites yet very few people raised concerns that it was denial of a right. It would not be right to say that bad things would happen if gay marriages are legalized. Those people who criticized contraceptives argued that legalizing it would lead to bad things, though the implementation has brought many good things with it.

To date, the original meaning of marriage has undergone a lot of changes in several dimensions. It is bias to look at marriage from one point of view and leave the other. For instance, making women be owners of property even in their marriage life, or giving them room to sue their husbands of rape. As a result, for any reform that is anticipated in the society, it would be unfair to consider only people among different sex partners without considering homosexuals.

Traditional beliefs which do not support gay marriage have contradictions. According to some researchers, there are very few marriage practices that are believed to be traditional and are indeed in tandem with traditional practices. One of the practices is that marriage is a union between two people. Looking at the bible, there are many instances of men with many wives. For instance, Jacob had two wives who twelve tribes of Israel originated from.

This is typically a religious dimension. In the ancient times, marriage was not recognized in the law neither did it have any attachments with property in Europe’s prole marriages. Marriage was about agreement as a result of love and no attachment to property. All the ideologies that support the concept of marriage today are inconsistent and illogical. Therefore, marriage has been practiced differently in all the communities in the world and gay marriages should be given a chance.

As I stated earlier, being gay is not something of a choice rather, it is something to do with a biological explanation. Most gay people have secondary characteristics resembling people of the opposite sex, some of which are like soft skin, soft voice even the walking gait resembles that of the opposite sex. Secondary sexual characteristics are usually brought about by the hormones in the body. Male and female have different hormonal balance, some are dominant than others.

This is purely biological occurrence not influenced by external forces. In case of a male with female hormones dominating against female hormones, he may develop secondary sexual characteristics resembling that of female. Gay should just be taken as a lifestyle and not be viewed as people with no morals.

Discriminating gay is like discriminating against minority religious groups. Laws in a country are based on religion which is dominant, how about religions which do not have many followers, should they be discriminate against in the expense of the others or treated equally.

This is against the law of freedom of worship. Some religions believe in gay marriages and based on the freedom of worship, gay marriages should not be discriminated against. Therefore, I propose that gay individuals in the society should be embraced and treated normally as others.

Conclusion

Gay is a practice that has been brought about in the society as a result of modernization and civilization. Just like any other changes in the society, gay marriages should not be condemned. People should accept the practice in the society so that there is understanding and respect of people’s rights. As argued above, I strongly support legalization of gay marriages.

References

American Civil Liberties Union. 1996. Gay Marriage. California, CA: Greenhaven Press.

Sullivan, A. 2000. Why ‘civil union’ isn’t marriage. Retrieved from http://www.indegayforum.org/articles/sullivan4.html.