The issue of gay marriages and gay institutions has attracted much attention and arguments with each passing day strengthening and intensifying the arguments.With modernity and civilisation creeping in to the contemporary society,the current stance seems to be taking a new perspective.
Should we or should we not allow gay marriages as civil unions? This is the question that many people would like to get an answer for. This essay gives an argumentative approach to this question by discussing the current stance on the issue as well as reasons as to why gay marriages and unions should never be legalized.
Gay marriage refers to the marital union between two males. Traditionally, the marriage institution consisted of only heterosexual unions but things have changed and with modernity and civilisation the issue of what constitutes a marriage has been questioned as more people strive to have the interpretation allow for marriage between people of the same sex.This issue carriesa lot of weight and significance in the society.
Diverse societies all over the world take this issue differently with some societies opting to fully support gay marriages as civil unions.Others have decided to remain neutral while others have taken a strong stand against the issue.
A recent report by NCSL indicated the diversity of the issue of gay marriages and unions. The report presented the following conclusions: States which license gay marriages areMassachusetts, Connecticut, California, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, District of Columbia; states which acknowledge gay unions include Rhode Island, New York, Maryland; states which support gaycivil unions include Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey; states which allow full spousal rights to domestic gay partnerships include California, Oregon, Nevada, Washington and states which allow limited spousal rights to domestic gay partnershipsinclude Hawaii, Maine, District of Columbia, Wisconsin. (NCSL 1) These statistics are a clear indicator of what the society thinks about gay marriages and unions.It may be justified to respect the thoughts and feelings of other people based on the fact that we are all different and we view issues from different perspectives.
A critical look at all the facts and perspectives of the marriage institution makes it apparent that gay marriage legalizationneed to be questioned or better still be discouraged and banned altogether.
The origin of a Marriage Institution
The first question that we need to ask ourselves is, where exactly did marriage institution begin? Come to think of it, all the theories of creation, be it evolution or creation all depend on the structure of heterosexual relationships. Evolution would not have brought us to where we are withoutheterosexual concept. Creation theory from all religions and cultures began with male and female including animal and the plant kingdoms and through heterosexual relationships the world came to be what it is today. Why did creation or revolution not start with two men or two women? Glenn put it straight and strongly opposes this opinion (Glenn 4). The answer is simple; nature does not recognize gay marriages or unions, a fact indicating how unnatural gay marriages are and why they should never be legalized.
Do gay marriage supporters fully support the whole idea? Surprisingly they don’t. Suppose we all woke up one day and agreed in unison that all people get into gay marriages. Definitely that would mark the end of mankind and that is why gay marriage supporters want to have adoption rights; to adopt children from those who obey natural laws of nature or have multi sexual relationships. Dulle has a strong argument against homosexual relationships “homosexual ‘families’ of whatever type are always and necessarily parasitic on heterosexual ones” (Dulle 1). And since they are parasitic, who would certainly want to be the victim of such parasitism? Definitely not me, and that is the reason why I will not support such parasitic gay unions (Dulle 1).
Improper Family Set up
Imagine yourself being brought up in a gay set up where both parents are men.
Seeing other kids cling passionately with love to their sweet mothers while all you have is two men in your life. How would you go through puberty and adolescent issues as a girl without having a natural motherly love to lean on during those trying moments? The fact is that it would be a traumatic experience for children to grow up in such a family set up. It is argued that“the marital family is also the foremost setting for the education and socialization of children; children learn about the world and their place in it primarily from those who raise them” (Dulle 1).
This is one big reason anyone should agree with me as to why gay marriages should never be legalized. Proponents argue that the society defines marriage and as such its definition should change with the changes with time. What is wrong with such an argument? Logically speaking marriage is not defined by the societybut rather acknowledged as the basic building block of the society. Marriageought to build a family intofamilies and the families in turn make a society. That is the reason why cultures, religions and legal structures do not recognize gay relationships. Ever seen a building made of stones alone or cement alone? Society made of men alone or women alone would not certainly be the best for you and that’s the reason why gay institutions should not be legalized (Newton 50). It is argued that legalizing the act will only bring to light what is usually done in the darkness. But does legalization make things right? I don’t think so.
Just because you can now eat ash doesn’t make ash a new wonderful type of a delicacy. Ash will still remain ash however legal it might be and it will never benefit the body. Likewise legalizing gay marriages will never make them right and on contrary it will only make matters worse by opening up avenues for experimentation which is so detrimental for the well-being of any society.
Legal systems are societal protective mechanisms against any threats to its existence by encouraging good ethical behaviors and discouraging potential unethical behaviors such as gay marriages. That is the reason why legal systems should desist from supporting gay relationships (Newton 51). Proponents argue that gay marriages promotes faithfulness by fulfilling ones desires the best way one may see appropriate. But we all have our own desires to do things some of which are not moral. It then becomes a moral question, whereby we have to exercise high degree of self-control for moral purposes. If we allow gay marriages because they have that kind of sexual orientation then we should as well allow man animal,grownups versus children, brother sister marriages or more still legalize things that we feel in ourselves as good to us irrespective of whether they harm the society or not. We all have feelings some of which might not be the best for the social fabric but we suppress them and we still remain human and happy. To make the point even clear, the legal system ensures that we stick to that which is moral.
Hargrave shared the same sentiments “I don’t deny the reality of those desires, or their strength – heterosexuals feel them as well;for the social good, they should either control their desires, or satisfy them discreetly” (Hargrave 1). From this argument gay marriages then depict weakness and lack of goodwill to exercise self-control at least for the sake of respect of nature. You agree with me that legal systems should help them exercise self-control just like the rest of us by prohibiting gay unions.
The Need for Correction
Proponents of gay marriages claim that gay people are born that way and that it is genetically entrenched in them. Research done to find proof of this claims concluded there is no such gene. To make it clear we all know there is no gene for killing, stealing, bestiality, pedophiles, rapists let alone gay people. Same sex attraction is not genetic but rather a social behavior which according to Hargrave “is the behavior of persons with child and adolescent Gender Identity Disorder” (Hargrave 1).If a child develops rickets,it is not because of her own making or genetics do we then satisfy her need for quality life by implementing rickets sports and rickets lifestyle? Certainly not but on the contrary control the rickets and make the society rickets free. The same argument applies to gay people. By understanding the root cause of this contentious issue and finding a permanent cure would be a celebrated achievement rather than trying effortlessly to accommodate this unnatural, unethical and uncultured behavior that we ourselves as a society have created by poor upbringing of our kids. It has been argued that prevention is better than cure and as such we should never legalize gay marriages instead use the energy resources to treat the root cause by of course letting our children grow in the best society possible.
It is evident that by a gay union cannot make up a family. Gay marriages by default cannot have children that can be claimed to belong to the family biologically. As argued from above therefore such kind of marriages cannot sustain a society. It is worth noting that if suchkinds of practices are allowed to take gain strength in the society then there is a likelihood that after some considerate period of time the society will likely be affected with an issue of under population.
Much debate, campaigns and arguments have taken sides. A closer look indicates that the society is divided across the board on whether to agree or disagree and to what extent.
By a critical look at the issue and calculated argumentative thought it has become clear that gay marriage and unions should be phased out of the society and such acts should never be legalized. Some of the reasons that were evident in the arguments were that gay relationships are against laws of nature, gay institutions are unnatural and parasitic hence only work to complicate family institution and furthermore gay marriage institutions were never the plan of God, nature or even evolution. Root cause of gay affiliations hasbeen attributed to adolescent gender identity disorder which needs to be addressed. These and other facts clearly validate the argument why gay marriage and gay unions should never be legalized.
Dulle, Jason. An Argument against Same-Sex Marriage. Plain Site,2011.
Web. 2 April 2011. org/html/same-sex_marriage.html> Glenn, Stanton. Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-sex Marriage and Parenting. London, U.K. , 2010. Print. Hargrave, Joe. A Secular Argument against Gay Marriage. American Catholic, 2010. Web. 2 April 2011. Web. 2 April 2011. aspx?tabid=16430> Newton, David. Same-Sex Marriage: A Reference Handbook. New York, NY: ABC-CLIO, 2010. Print.
org/html/same-sex_marriage.html> Glenn, Stanton. Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-sex Marriage and Parenting. London, U.K.
, 2010. Print. Hargrave, Joe. A Secular Argument against Gay Marriage.
American Catholic, 2010. Web. 2 April 2011.
Web. 2 April 2011. aspx?tabid=16430> Newton, David. Same-Sex Marriage: A Reference Handbook. New York, NY: ABC-CLIO, 2010. Print.
aspx?tabid=16430> Newton, David. Same-Sex Marriage: A Reference Handbook. New York, NY: ABC-CLIO, 2010. Print.