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.
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.
There is nothing that says judges, individuals, or companies can ignore a law once its made because their beliefs don't follow under that law. Some people may believe in human sacrifice but that doesn't make it any less then murder. In The Judge John Kane case it was said that they were merely trying to follow through with their First Amendment right of freedom of religion. Although freedom of religion means they have the freedom to have it within the boundaries of the law. Health insurance is not a part of the religion therefore they must follow the Obama mandate.
just as we do but different sexual orientation. To me, I don’t care if you a Homosexual, as long as you’re comfortable with your sexuality, that’s fine with me. Also that’s just being very Page 2 judgmental. If I was president, would make Homosexual marriage legal because they have a right to love and to care just like we do. 3.
The IRC, or the Internal Revenue Code, “exempts amounts transferred to a surviving spouse from the decedent’s taxable estate. For same-sex couples who are legally barred from marriage, this exemption is not available,” (“Federal Rights”). This means that homosexual partners cannot exempt estate taxes that heterosexual couples can which is not equal. The government should offer protection for every citizen because it promotes the marriage that America is equal for
So if you are saying that gay marriage should not be allowed to marry based on moral issues, you are in essence saying that morally it is worse to be a homosexual than to be a rapist, murderer, or child molester. It is this kind of thinking that has held society back. Still others would argue that due to divorce and cohabitation the institution of marriage is already in a weakened state. They view allowing legal gay marriage as the potential straw that is going to break marriages back. I would acknowledge marriage does not have the same prevalence and level of commitment it held in past generations but the decline of marriage has nothing to do with homosexuals.
Homosexual Marriage: Society, Rights, and Adoption The United States is denying good people a better life based on sexual orientation. Acceptance of homosexual marriage is a major issue in today’s society. This is a civil issue, and the United States needs to start realizing that they are denying marriage rights to homosexuals because of moral reasons. What ever happened to separation of church and state? Opponents of homosexual marriage feel that by allowing gay and lesbians the right to marriage undermines the traditional definition of marriage.
One main issue with homosexuals not receiving the same rights as heterosexuals is the lack of benefits. Due to that fact that gay couples cannot get married in most states, they also do not have access to most benefits that married couples receive. These benefits include: * Death benefits: if a spouse of an unmarried couple passes, the other spouse cannot receive bereavement, right to file wrongful death claims, or inherit assets. * Family leave: gay spouses do not receive paid leave to care for a sick partner or
Despite such rapid development of human beings and extensive globalization, our view towards people who are different from us still remains narrow and conservative. Whether to socially accept and recognize them has been the biggest dilemma of the year, but the primary question is: why do we decide and judge whether to accept them or not? Why should the homosexual people, as a minority, deny their individuality in order to fit into the American society, just because of their personal preference? The matter of homosexuality is just like the fact that someone has really big eyes or short height. It is as impossible to change, and doesn’t have to be changed.
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