A Critique of William Bennett’s “Against Gay Marriage” The issue of homosexuals in our society is becoming more of a debate. The debate is no longer whether we should accept them, but rather, should they be legally recognized. Gay marriage should not be legalized because of its effect it would have on society. William Bennett’s article “Against Gay Marriage” was originally published in the Washington Post and highlights the negative effects of gay marriage on our society. Bennett wrongfully believes that homosexual and heterosexual unions are not comparable; however, if we change the definition of marriage, our society’s understanding of marriage would be irreconcilably ruined.
Personally, I believe that homosexuals should be granted the same rights as heterosexual couples. As someone said, “marriage is a basic human right. You cannot tell people they cannot fall in love.” While he said this in reference to marriage between races, the same can be said about homosexuals. Who are we to allow some people to get married, and tell others they cannot. As a nation, we have no right to take
Everyone should be treated the same whether or not they are homosexual or heterosexual.” Pondering her answer makes it clear that not everyone is equal. The United States is about being equal no matter whether someone, as an American citizen, male or female, black or white, or even have disabilities. Yet, what the United States did not realize is that the judgment it held against homosexuals would come, in a sense, to bite them in the butt. Equality is about putting everyone on the same playing field. As of today, interracial marriages are equal to same race marriages thanks to Mr. and Mrs. Richard Loving in the case Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S (1967), interracial couples are able to marry.
And these homosexual Americans need to be recognized equally under the laws of our land. As Americans, we are not asked to like each other. In fact, Sullivan agrees that bigoted have the right to their prejudices. We are not asked to hold hands or to sing “Kumbya” together. We are only asked and even expected to respect the rights of each other under our laws: blacks and whites, women and men, the disabled and the able, the unbigoted and the bigoted, homosexuals and
From “Rights, Responsibilities and Love.” Meriden (Connecticut) Record-Journal 21 June 2009. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web 26 June 2012. “Same-sex parents lobby Congress for equal rights.” All Things Considered 17 May 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Prop 8 Jennifer Raback Morse argues that “gay rights activists misunderstand the motives of proposition 8 supporters: The proposition is not an expression of hatred toward gays, but a way of restraining an overzealous state Supreme Court which had attempted to redefine marriage.” She views marriage as a “gender-based institution that attaches mothers and fathers to each other and to their children.” (pg. 83) I agree with Morse. She has a good point that the proposition is not an expression of hatred toward gays, but an attempt to redefine marriage, and children should have at least the chance to have a relationship with a mom and dad. I agree with Morse because the proposition was never to show hatred towards homosexuals, but it was to protect marriage. Personally I have gone through arguments with many people about the proposition and what I stood for as a person.
Gay Stereotypes: The Use of Sexual Orientation as a Cue for Gender-Related Attributes. Retrieved from Proquest Web: http://search.proquest.com/docview/225363069/fulltextPDF?accountid=36202 Williams, W. L. (n.d.). The Two-spirit People of Indigenous North America. Retrieved from First People :
Homosexual Marriage: Boies versus Stanton The fight for civil rights in the United States has gone through different phases, the most current of which is the dispute over whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to marry. The various states of the union have treated this issue in different ways: some have passed laws that allow gays and lesbians to wed; however, most have held on to the idea that marriage should be reserved for heterosexual couples. By and large, the nation is divided over this matter. David Boies and Glenn T. Stanton discuss the basic arguments behind this controversy. Boies supports gay marriage; Stanton rejects it.
According to the teachings of Christianity sexual desire was only useful within the sanctity of marriage. If sexuality activity is practiced for other reasons than reproduction, then it would be considered a sin. Homosexuality, masturbation, and the use of birth control would be considered the opposition of God's plan and morally wrong. This view is often classified as conservative and very strict. However it is the foundation of debates regarding the moral status of a large number of sexual acts – the latent stigma still attached to homosexuality is a prime example of the influence of the theological standpoint on sexual desires.
To the contrary, the amendment imposes a special disability on those persons alone. Homosexuals are forbidden the safeguards that others enjoy or may seek without constraint" (J.A Kennedy,2009) The truth is, I think it is sick that here in the United States, gay marriage is not a federally protected right. This is bigotry, pure and simple, and it needs to stop. Denying two women or two men the right to marry is as cruel and absurd as it was to deny two straight people of different races the right to marry. Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't the Constitution of the United States guarantee everyone the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?