He discredits the argument that, ”marriage is fundamentally a procreative unit” (Stoddard 738). The government tries to rectify not allowing same sex marriage to be legal because marriage is supposed to be a procreative unit. People should be entitled to love and marry whomever it is that they choose. The government tries to justify their standing on gay marriage by acknowledging the fact that same sex couples would not be able to birth a child together. If this is in fact a valuable reason to prevent someone from marrying, then why doesn’t the government create a law banning all women and men who cannot or will not have children from being able to legally marry.
All things he obviously doesn’t think the gay community is capable of. I thought going into this assignment that if I read the oppositions portion of the debate, it would sway me to want to write this assignment against gay marriage, but I must say I couldn’t stand to read the authors article. Not only was it hard to follow, in my opinion, some of his statements offended me. (AND IM NOT EVEN GAY!) Marriage connects us with our animal origins?
Jessica Rasdall Gay Marriage SHOULD be a legal The Declaration of Independence states that are man are created equal and are given certain unalienable rights. These rights include Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. If this is so, why can’t people marry whoever they want to marry? Even though I’m not gay, I feel it is wrong to not allow gays to marry and if I was in congress I would pass a bill that made gay marriage legal in all states. If a person is deeply in love with a person of the same sex they shouldn’t have to worry about if the government will let them get married or not and I have many reason as to how the government is violating peoples right’s.
For example, the debate about gay marriage and if it is legal. As of now many states do not allow the marriage of gay people. Some states allow them to become a couple but call it something else such as the union of two people. The difference between the state and federal government is that each state has a different law about gay marriage. Not every state agrees that gay marriage is wrong and illegal, but if the federal government were to pass a amendment outlawing gay marriage then every state who allows gay marriage would have to declare it unconstitutional and against the law.
In doing so, other states may have to follow along due to the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Claus. The meaning and definition of marriage will be changed if legal union of gay and lesbian couples are acknowledged. Bennett claims that marriage is recognized universally as an act meant to unite a man and a woman. Marriage is society’s most important institution; if same sex couples are able to marry, this important institution will be destroyed. Bennett’s article is effective
Marriage is the most important social institution, and it is a formality for the perpetuation of procreation; hence same sex marriage cannot meet this requirement. In other words, same sex marriage does not aid in procreation, which sustains our species. Same sex marriage will destroy our society. Some believe that although gay couples cannot produce children, they can have adopted children and fulfill a social need. That may seem like a good idea, but I am sure that there must be differences between a child who grows up in an environment with same sex couples than with regular heterosexual parents.
Me personally, I think anyone should have a right to marry whoever they want to marry because nobody cannot change a person’s lifestyle unless that person wants to change. Homosexuals should have equal rights as Heterosexuals do. They are humans just like everyone else. They work, provide, nurture, etc. just as we do but different sexual orientation.
Same sex marriage is an argument of civil liberties, but it also links to religions. Many Christians refuse to support gay marriage and argue that it is a violation in God’s words. However, Katha Pollit and Charles Colson in their essays show different points of view about gay marriage, providing a variety of types of evidence that support
It is not easy to change things which are natural. Even if, homosexuality was a choice, it is against the constitution to discriminate people who have voluntarily chosen to enter into civil unions because that will be violating the constitution. The society is liberal and, everybody should be allowed the freedom of association and that of pursuing happiness as long as they do not interfere with the freedoms of other citizens. Recognizing civil unions by the federal government is a way of respecting the rights and freedoms of homosexuals. It is also a way of demonstrating the society’s willingness to tolerate other people who are different from them.