same sex marriage should be legalized argumentative essay

Evidence is clear on the benefits of legalising same-sex  marriage

PhD Candidate, School of Arts and Social Sciences, James Cook University

Disclosure statement

Ryan Anderson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

James Cook University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

Emotive arguments and questionable rhetoric often characterise debates over same-sex marriage. But few attempts have been made to dispassionately dissect the issue from an academic, science-based perspective.

Regardless of which side of the fence you fall on, the more robust, rigorous and reliable information that is publicly available, the better.

There are considerable mental health and wellbeing benefits conferred on those in the fortunate position of being able to marry legally. And there are associated deleterious impacts of being denied this opportunity.

Although it would be irresponsible to suggest the research is unanimous, the majority is either noncommittal (unclear conclusions) or demonstrates the benefits of same-sex marriage.

Further reading: Conservatives prevail to hold back the tide on same-sex marriage

What does the research say?

Widescale research suggests that members of the LGBTQ community generally experience worse mental health outcomes than their heterosexual counterparts. This is possibly due to the stigmatisation they receive.

The mental health benefits of marriage generally are well-documented . In 2009, the American Medical Association officially recognised that excluding sexual minorities from marriage was significantly contributing to the overall poor health among same-sex households compared to heterosexual households.

Converging lines of evidence also suggest that sexual orientation stigma and discrimination are at least associated with increased psychological distress and a generally decreased quality of life among lesbians and gay men.

A US study that surveyed more than 36,000 people aged 18-70 found lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals were far less psychologically distressed if they were in a legally recognised same-sex marriage than if they were not. Married heterosexuals were less distressed than either of these groups.

So, it would seem that being in a legally recognised same-sex marriage can at least partly overcome the substantial health disparity between heterosexual and lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons.

The authors concluded by urging other researchers to consider same-sex marriage as a public health issue.

A review of the research examining the impact of marriage denial on the health and wellbeing of gay men and lesbians conceded that marriage equality is a profoundly complex and nuanced issue. But, it argued that depriving lesbians and gay men the tangible (and intangible) benefits of marriage is not only an act of discrimination – it also:

disadvantages them by restricting their citizenship;

hinders their mental health, wellbeing, and social mobility; and

generally disenfranchises them from various cultural, legal, economic and political aspects of their lives.

Of further concern is research finding that in comparison to lesbian, gay and bisexual respondents living in areas where gay marriage was allowed, living in areas where it was banned was associated with significantly higher rates of:

mood disorders (36% higher);

psychiatric comorbidity – that is, multiple mental health conditions (36% higher); and

anxiety disorders (248% higher).

But what about the kids?

Opponents of same-sex marriage often argue that children raised in same-sex households perform worse on a variety of life outcome measures when compared to those raised in a heterosexual household. There is some merit to this argument.

In terms of education and general measures of success, the literature isn’t entirely unanimous. However, most studies have found that on these metrics there is no difference between children raised by same-sex or opposite-sex parents.

In 2005, the American Psychological Association released a brief reviewing research on same-sex parenting. It unambiguously summed up its stance on the issue of whether or not same-sex parenting negatively impacts children:

Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.

Further reading: Same-sex couples and their children: what does the evidence tell us?

Drawing conclusions

Same-sex marriage has already been legalised in 23 countries around the world , inhabited by more than 760 million people.

Despite the above studies positively linking marriage with wellbeing, it may be premature to definitively assert causality .

But overall, the evidence is fairly clear. Same-sex marriage leads to a host of social and even public health benefits, including a range of advantages for mental health and wellbeing. The benefits accrue to society as a whole, whether you are in a same-sex relationship or not.

As the body of research in support of same-sex marriage continues to grow, the case in favour of it becomes stronger.

• Human rights
• Same-sex marriage
• Same-sex marriage plebiscite

Biocloud Project Manager - Australian Biocommons

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

School of Social Sciences – Public Policy and International Relations opportunities

Deputy Editor - Technology

Should same-sex marriage be legalized? Argumentative essay

HungHung 1 / -   Sep 21, 2015   #1 Topic: Should same-sex marriage be legalized? (Argumentative essay) Most people believe that they deserve the rights they are granted by the government. However, not all citizens are afforded equal rights. Most homosexual people are consistently denied the right to have a same-sex marriage even if they are also upstanding citizens. They are held at an unfair disadvantage solely because of their sexual orientation. This discrimination must stop because homosexual couples are law-abiding citizens too, who should be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples. Personally, I totally agree that same-sex marriage should be legalized, because it turns a moral right into a civil right, it also decreases the divorce and suicide rates. First, it can be clearly seen that the legalization of same-sex marriage will turn a moral right into a civil right. Same-sex couples have the right to the very same benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy, as homosexuals were also born by the way heterosexuals were born. In other words, they are both human. Legalizing same-sex marriage will help the relationship of homosexual people become more serious and responsible. Equally important, the legalization of same-sex marriage also has deep spiritual significance, it demonstrates that the society respects the dignity of all people and protects for all citizens. There is no doubt that all citizens pay their taxes, so they must have the same rights. Marriage is not the privilege of a group of people, everyone has the right to marry voluntarily. Therefore, heterosexuals have the right to be married, then there is no reason that homosexuals do not have the right to get married in a legal way. Moreover, today's concerns regarding same-sex marriage are the same in that no government has the right to deny marriage between two individuals who do care and love each other. Homosexual couples' freedom is absolutely broken because they are incapable of marrying the one they truly love (Ten reasons why gay marriage should be legalized, 2014). To protect that freedom, America's government official allowed same-sex marriage on 27th June 2015. "Today is a big step in our march toward equality. Gay and lesbian couples now have the right to marry, just like anyone else...America should be very proud" President Barack Obama stated . The official acceptance of same-sex marriage in the United States has created gigantic hope for homosexual people all over the world that there will be a day they can marry to the one they love in their own country. In conclusion, the legalization of same-sex marriage of the American Government in particular and of the whole humanity in general will turn a moral right into a civil right. Furthermore, it is apparent that the divorce and suicide rates will decrease if same-sex marriage is legalized. Love is the most important matter in any marriage (Gay marriage. Why it should be legalized, 2014). As a result, allowing homosexuals the opportunity to get married will increase marriage rate because less couples will get divorced due to incompatibility or infertility. In other words, legalizing same-sex marriage will decrease divorce rate because it cannot get any worse than it is right now. For example, Massachusetts - the state has legalized same-sex marriage in 2004, has decreased 20% the divorce rate and became the state which had lowest divorce rate in the United States. In addition, giving homosexual people a chance to get married will also decrease the suicide rate. Teenagers are commit suicide are due to they being bullied at their school as a result of their sexual orientation. Legalizing same-sex marriage will show them that homosexuality is accepted and respected in society. In other words, this legalization will explain to younger generation that being different is not a social disability, so that they will never feel the need to take their own lives because they are homosexual. For instance, the lasted statistic of the U.S. Census Bureau showed that the LGB teenagers in the family which has high rejection are easy to suicide 8.4 times than LGT peers come from the family which has low rejection. The study also showed that half of all students who have experienced homophobic bullying have thought about killing themselves. Unfortunately, 20% have tried to, suggesting that homosexual youngsters are three times more likely to attempt suicide than other teenagers (Trevor, 2013). Thus, homosexual people also have the right to marry the person they really love. Moreover, the homosexuals as well as their love all need the acceptance and respect from society. Consequently, the legalization of same-sex marriage will diminish the divorce and suicide rates. Those who disapprove of the same-sex marriage may argue that same-sex couples are unable to procreate. However, it has been investigated that there are more children are adopted in the country which has legalized the same-sex marriage (Top 10 reasons why gay marriage should be legal, 2014). Most adoption agencies discriminate against same-sex couples and make it incredibly difficult for them to adopt children. Many agencies will only release children to "married" couples, therefore rejecting stable, loving, homosexual parents. By legalizing homosexual marriages, adoption agencies will be forced to grant the same respect and right to homosexual couples. Same-sex marriage will increase the chances for thousands of foster children to gain loving parents and families. Moreover, procreation has never been required for marriage, so the premise that marriage is for procreation is wrong - or at least incomplete. Sterile couples, old couples, and couples who simply don't want to procreate are all allowed to marry. Nobody objects to their marriages, so nobody should on this ground object to same-sex marriages. In other words, the true meaning of marriages is to create a happy environment for everyone, not create an environment just for procreation. Another objection to same-sex marriage is that the traditional marriage is sacred institutions which foster the common good of society. Accordingly, the alteration of the traditional views on marriage may weaken the institution and lead to polygamy, even interspecies marriages. On the other hand, same-sex marriage will never affect to the traditional marriage, they can totally exist together (TFP Student Action, 2009). From a purely biological standpoint, heterosexual monogamy can be seen as unnatural when we consider the common occurrence of polyamorous societies, communal child-rearing and the like throughout history and evolution. Nowadays, our modern society allows people who barely know each other to get married and separate only a few months later. Which is more likely to weaken the institution of marriage - a male and female couple with this flippant attitude or two members of the LGBT community who are willing to take the risk of judgment and discrimination, simply to fight for the recognition of their relationship? To sum up, legalizing homosexual marriages will increase a large number of children adopted successfully and same-sex marriage will never threaten traditional marriage, they can coexist side by side. In conclusion, same-sex marriage should be legalized because of many reasons: turning a moral right into a civil right and decreasing not only the divorce but also the suicide rate. Although some people believed that homosexual marriage is harmful and must be opposed, examining the good sides of legalizing same-sex marriage proves otherwise. The acceptance for homosexual marriage will increase amount of children successfully adopted. And there is no negative effect when same-sex marriage is legalized. Heterosexuals have the right to love and marry to the love they love, so do homosexuals, the reason is that they are both human. P.S. Please help me check this argumentative essay. Is there any mistakes? Is it well-structured? Thank you very much !!! :"3

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essay Examples >
• Essays Topics >
• Essay on Love

Gay Marriage Argument Essays: Should It Be Legalized

Type of paper: Argumentative Essay

Topic: Love , Same Sex Marriage , LGBT , Relationships , Marriage , Gay , Homosexuality , Family

Words: 2750

Published: 03/31/2020

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Introduction

The legalization of Gay marriage has stirred a lot of controversies in America, and the world in general. Traditionally, marriage has been rooted in many cultures, practices and even traditions, as the union of a man and a woman. Same sex marriages or relationships have been prohibited all along, and people that went against these practices were often termed as outcasts. But in the recent years, the rate of gay marriages and relationships has been on the rise. This has stirred a lot of debate on whether they should be legalized or not. Movements and societies have been formed to protects the gay rights and ensure that their traits are accepted by the society. The church and some individuals in the society, including politicians and Anti- gay movements, have been beating their heads on the wall trying to come up with reasons why it should not be legalized, and at the same time, trying to convince the states that have accepted same sex marriages to overturn the courts decisions. As the society evolves, the traits and changes that come with it should be embraced. The society has come from far concerning so many issues, from racism to accepting divorce in the marriage institution. All these factors do not matter in this day age and age in America. Same way as these was accepted in our society, so should homosexuality be accepted. Gay marriages should be legalized, amidst all the controversies that come with it, since intimate matters should be of private concern and the society is evolving.

The circus of Gay marriages

Gay marriages have been in the community for a long time, but the controversies of these relationships rose up in 1990’s, when a court in Hawaii ruled in favor of a gay couple that had been denied the right to marry each other, in 1996. This decision stirred a lot of debate where many people were against it and termed it as an abomination. The constitution was later changed to prohibit same sex marriages in the state. This debate became more than a state matter since it blew the interests of people to a national level. These debates have been ongoing up to date with parties from both the opposing and the supporting side exchanging words, each in favor of their side. Canada allowed same sex marriages1n 2004, saying that prohibiting gay couples from their rights will be a matter of discrimination. America has followed suit in legalizing gay marriages where states like Massachusetts passed a law to allow same sex couples to marry. It goes without saying that a great deal of politics has also been associated with homosexuality, where some of the politicians are against it, and others are in favor of it. The marriage institution is under both the law of any land, and under the laws of the church, or any religion for that matter. Some people therefore argue that each state should have laws governing the marriage institutions in their own states, others argue that as much as the church and the government have laws concerning the marriage institution, it should not be any of their concern especially when it comes to who marries who in the society (Burns 45). In America, sixteen states already allow marriages of the same sex couples. In 1996, the U. S congress passed the DOMA law (Defense of Marriage Act), in an attempt to define and limit marriage to only a man and a woman, and not people of the same sex. A group of activists took the matter to the high court in 2005, but the case was overturned by the U. S Eight Circuit Court of appeals the next year, 2006. Later in the year, the same court held that DOMA was unconstitutional and was depriving homosexuals the equality rights that they should be enjoying. The Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional for the federal government to deny same sex married couples their rights, saying that it was unconstitutional. They made this ruling on 26th June 2013, but it is only limited to the states that have legalized same sex marriages(Family Guy).

Anti- gay movements

Anti- gay movements have been widely recognized for not supporting same sex marriages. Their campaigns to stop legalization of gay marriages have worked in some states, where and have opposed any form of legal protections on gays. These restrictions include denying gays rights to protect their families and rights to bond with their children (Rimmerman and Wilcox 179). However, these movements have been associated with the spread of mere propaganda concerning gays in the community. Their claims on the ‘evils’ that these unions bring are baseless. Some of anti- gay people claimed that the gay people were mostly involved in crimes, and that they actually perpetrated most of the crimes in the country. They were accused of dealing in drugs, and being the, main of the widespread of sexually transmitted diseases. All the claims were baseless and they had no prove of them, because, for example, the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, is also experienced among many straight marriages, especially due to infidelity.

Gay marriages and literary works

Many productions have been coming up recently, especially in the motion pictures word, all in support of gay marriages. They all depict families with gay people, from parents to the children and how they cope with each other, the love and harmony that they have in their families, despite their sexual orientations, for example, Family guy, the Simpsons and the likes. Comic books too have had their own share of the story with Astonishing X-Men comic series, depicting the marriage of the super hero, Jean-Paul Beaubier to his partner Kyle Jinadu. All these works at aiming at promoting the same sex marriage institution, and letting people know that the sexual orientations of individuals do not affect their productivity or their way of associating with other members of the society (Astonishing X-Men).

Why it should not be legalized

The marriage institution has been known over time to contain a relationship between a man and a woman; a relationship that is made through understanding, love and more importantly, the sexual relationship which is the proper pro- creation process. Gay couples cannot bear children of their own, even with the advanced technologies in the present day and age, which will force them to adopt children. One of the most important things of bringing up children in a family made up of a woman and a man is that, they will get to experience the worlds of having both a father and a mother. This will be hard for children brought up in gay marriages, because they will get to experience the worlds of having either two mothers or two fathers. This will be violence against the children’s development process as their world will not be in the best or the agreeable environment for human development (Burns 27). Its legalization will also be undermining the natural sex laws that people know, and have been practiced for ages now. Children will be brought up in confused society that does not know how to support and fight for the morality of its people.

Homosexuality and religion (why it should not be legalized)

Religious leaders have been on the front line to bar same sex marriages and relationships. The bible has been used as the main guide to morality in the society over the past centuries. Many verses can be quoted from the bible, where the institutions of same marriages have been termed as evil and unreligious. The punishment of these practices has also been detailed, with eternal life in hell being the main highlight (King James Bible, Rev. 21). Christian leaders argue that same sex marriage is not only prohibited in Christianity, but across all other religions. Their stand against this debate is one that has been held for a long time, and they are still going strong, with some even suggesting jailing and even killing of people found marrying from the same sex. Some of the religious institutions may be adamant on providing services like accommodation, employment, adoption and others to same sex partners. It still doesn’t matter whether these religious leaders support it or not, bottom line is, if homosexuality is legalized, this will be against the laws and commandments of God. From the beginning of the world and creation, in the Garden of Eden, God mad man (Adam), in His own image, and later on, made a woman for him from his rib, Eve, and told them to go fill the world (King James Bible, Gen. 1). Pro- creation and marriage institution was set to be between a man and a woman, right from the beginning of the world, not between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman. Legalization of these unions will therefore be against the laws of the church and the laws of creation in general.

Gay marriage and other laws (why it should not be legalized)

The legalization of same sex marriages has been argued to bring about a spin in the legalization of other unacceptable traits and behaviors. Many have argued that if it is legalized, laws on incest, polygamy and even bestiality. Many religious leaders and activists have associated homosexuality with bestiality, polygamy and pedophilia among others, and they argue that, if homosexuality is legalized, we will observe a wave of moral values erosion in the society. Children will be brought up in a society with no moral values and will be led to believe that homosexuality is an ideal lifestyle and an acceptable trait. The rates of children molestation will be on the rise in the society (Rimmerman and Wilcox 179). It is believed that the legalization will make homosexuality more acceptable in the society, lead to the fracture of the family system, and it also can be a major setback on the scale of the Supreme Court when it legalized abortion. Activists believe that the fight will be long with the court, so as to overturn the court’s decision.

Advantages of legalization

It is believed that legalization of gay marriages will lead to an improvement in the lives of heterosexuals. Due to the stigma that come a long with coming out of the closet; many gay people do not come into the light. The need to be accepted by the society, whether in family and social gatherings, the wish to be accepted by people around just like any heterosexual person and the fear of being denied employment and other societal values, have led gay people to unwanted marriages. Most of the gay people have been married to people they really do not love just to hide their identity from the society. These fraudulent marriages are not good, for both parties, and even the children. If the same sex marriage institution is legalized, the high rate of divorces that is being experienced at the moment will go down; since gays will stop marrying people of the opposite side to just enable them hide their sex orientation. A reduction in the divorce rates will promote more stable families in the society and due to this; many children will be brought up in stable families. Another advantage of these marriages is that many orphaned children will get stable families, and be brought up in much better conditions when they are adopted. This will lead to the improvement of struggling communities: for example, the number of children who will be homeless and in the foster system will go down (Alvear 1). Another importance of legalizing gay marriages and relationships is that the rate of suicides associated with gay teenagers will reduce. Teenagers and young man and ladies have been committing suicide for the reasons quiet obvious; negativities associated with homosexuality. They feel different from their age mates and they alienate themselves from their peers for fear of being bullied. This alienation and lack of somebody to talk to makes them feel lonely and they are usually in their own world mostly. This leads to suicide since they that feel no one understands. Others have turned to substance abuse to just relieve them from the guilt of being different from the rest of the world. All these factors, especially substance abuse, lead to high rates of crime in the country, especially among the youths and teenagers. Legalization of same sex marriages will help them feel acceptable to the society, and due to this, they will no longer have the urge to turn to drugs for refuge, or suicide for that matter(Moats 45). This discrimination against gay people hurts everyone in the society, whether they are gay or not. When the gay in the community are not accepted, they end up marrying people they do not love, and being in the closet about their sexual orientation, their partners may be really in love with them. The gay person in the marriage will be hurt, since they will feel unappreciated and not satisfied. A marriage should have the happiness and satisfaction of both parties, failure to which, it seizes to be a stable relationship, and it faces many challenges. The other party in the relationship will also not be satisfied because their partner will not be comfortable sharing the many aspects of intimacy with them. This is what leads to divorces, hurting both parties, especially those who had no idea that there partner was gay. If that family had children, their dreams and hopes of growing up in a complete and happy family are shattered. They become the laughing stock among their peers, who do not appreciate gay relationships, due to what they hear from the society about them. These factors can all be avoided if same sex marriages are legalized in the country, and in all the states(Gay Marriage opponents). Though Christians tend to hate on the gay people and condemn them, it leaves the question of what happened to the biblical commandment of loving one another. This legalization will be able to open up their minds and even their hearts to their gay brothers and sisters. In turn, this will promote the spirit of togetherness in America, where people can interact without hating each on other based on their sexual orientation. A more co-ordinate community, that is united by love and peace progresses both economically and socially, and this, will be at the advantage of everybody in the country.

Same sex marriage should be legalized in all states since it has many advantages, and with the changing society, people should learn to embrace these changes. When it is legalized, the perception of people will change over time and all will be the same within no time.

Works Cited

Alvear, Michael. “Q: Would thhttp://minfin.com.ua/currency/nbu/e Legalization of Gay Marriage Result in a Net Benefit to Heterosexuals? Yes: Divorce Rates Triggered by Fraudulent Marriages Will Go Down and More Children Will Grow Up in stable Homes.’’ Insight on the News 22 Dec. 2003: 1. Print Astonishing X-Men.Dir. Joss Whedon.Perf. John Cassady . Shout Factoey, 2012. DVD. Burns, Kate. Gay marriage. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Print. Family Guy.Dir. Seth MacFarlane.Perf Seth Mac Farlene. 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 2012.DVD. Gay Marriage opponents see Massachusetts legalization as major setback. Knight Ridder Tribune.Business News.McClatchy- Tribune Information Services. 2004. Highbeam Research. 14 Mar. 2014 <http/www.highbeam.com>. Moats, David. Civil wars: a battle for gay marriages. Orlando: Harcourt, 2004. Print. King James Bible.Ed. Gordon Campbell.Oxford University Press, 2010. Print. Rimmerman, Craig A., and Clyde Wilcox.The Politics of same- sex marriage. Chicago:

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 523

This paper is created by writer with

ID 267095354

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Road case studies, fishing case studies, gene case studies, hypertension case studies, privacy case studies, developing reports, intern research papers, inducing research papers, internal medicine research papers, calculation essays, overheard essays, soliloquy essays, skyscraper essays, stereo essays, drain essays, reservoir essays, jacket essays, creationist essays, adagio essays, grande essays, inman essays, molloy essays, walters essays, terhune essays, helles essays, idea analysis paper essay example, research statement question what are the ethical issues in the tuskegee experiments essay example, business plan on psychological factors, example of research paper on history of western dress, example of essay on technology, free research paper on management purchases related to project, pare details report example, report on presenting business plans, example of course work on inline css styles, example of trusted computing base course work, example of essay on forget what you know about good study habits, social network and privacy research proposal example, finance course work, stressed essay example, the volumetric analysis of the amount of vitamin c in a tablet essay example, term paper on social interactions language development hypothesis, research paper on people of the middle east, example of research paper on research in psychology.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Read our research on: Abortion | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

An argument against same-sex marriage: an interview with rick santorum.

The debate over same-sex marriage in the United States is a contentious one, and advocates on both sides continue to work hard to make their voices heard. To explore the case against gay marriage, the Pew Forum has turned to Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and now a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Sen. Santorum is also the author of the 2005 book It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good , in which he makes the case for promoting families anchored by a married mother and father.

A counterargument explaining the case for same-sex marriage is made by Jonathan Rauch, a senior writer at The National Journal .

Featuring: Rick Santorum , Senior Fellow, Ethics and Public Policy Center; Former U.S. Senator

Interviewer: David Masci , Senior Research Fellow, Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

In this Q&A: Why oppose gay marriage? The “go-slow” approach Child welfare Christian values

Question & Answer

Gay rights advocates and others say that gay and lesbian people want to get married for the same reasons that straight people do – they want to be in caring, stable relationships, they want to build a life and even start a family with someone else. Why shouldn’t they be able to do this?

See, I think that’s the foundational flaw with this whole debate. The law is as it has been for 200-plus years, and so the burden is on them to make the persuasive case as to why they should be married, not just for their benefit but for what the impact is on society and marriage as a whole, and on children.

I would argue that the gay community has not made the argument. They may have made the argument as to why they want it, but they have not made any arguments as to why this is beneficial for society. They have not made any argument – convincing or otherwise, that I’m aware of – as to what the impact would be on heterosexual marriages and what the impact would be on children.

They have no studies. They have no information whatsoever about what it would do to the moral ecology of the country, what it would do to religious liberty, what it would do to the mental and physical health of children – nothing. They’ve made no case. Basically the case they’ve made is, “We want what you want, and therefore you should give it to us.”

So you’re saying that advocates of same-sex marriage are not seeing the big picture?

Yes. I have a book that was written a few years ago called It Takes a Family . In that book I have a chapter on moral ecology, and I explain that if you go to the National Archives, you will come to a section that has, as far as the eye can see, rows and rows and rows of environmental impact statements, because we have laws in this country that say before you go out and you put in a bridge across a creek, you have to go out and see whether what you’re doing is disturbing the landscape there.

Yet when it comes to something that I happen to believe is actually more important than a particular plot of land – the entire moral ecology of our country, who we are as a people, what we stand for, what we teach our children, what our values and ethics are – people argue that we can build the equivalent of a strip mall without even thinking about what those consequences are.

Some people in favor of gay marriage have argued for a “go-slow” approach, acknowledging that we’re in largely unknown territory and that a majority of Americans are not yet comfortable with same-sex marriage. Does that attitude allay any of your fears?

No. They want the convenient accelerator of the courts to put this in play, and then they want the judicious temperament of the American democratic system to govern it. I don’t think you can have your cake and eat it too. Same-sex marriage advocates are not going to state legislatures, except in some cases for civil unions. They are using the courts.

If the courts are going to be your accelerator, then get ready for a ride. And if the courts ultimately say, “Marriage must be allowed between anybody and anybody,” the gay rights advocates are not going to say, “Well, you’ve gone too far.” No, I think the go-slow argument is there to make us feel better, but it doesn’t hold water.

Another argument made by gay rights advocates is that with or without marriage, gay families are already a widespread reality. They point out that we already have gay couples living together, some with children. And they ask: Isn’t it better that they be legally married to each other, if for no other reason than for the benefit and the welfare of the children?

The answer is no – because of the consequences to society as a whole. And again, those are consequences that they choose to ignore. What society should be about is encouraging what’s best for children. What’s best for children, we know, is a mother and a father who are the parents of that child, raising that child in a stable, married relationship, and we should have laws that encourage that, that support that.

What you’re talking about with same-sex marriage is completely deconstructing marriage and taking away a privilege that is given to two people, a man and a woman who are married, who have a child or adopt a child. We know it’s best for children and for society that men and women get married. We know it’s healthier. We know it’s better for men. We know it’s better for women. We know it’s better for communities.

What we don’t know is what happens with other options. And once you get away from the model of “what we know is best” and you get into the other options, from my perspective, there’s no stopping it. And also from my perspective, you devalue what you want to value, which is a man and woman in marriage with a child or children. And when you devalue that, you get less of it. When you get less of it, society as a whole suffers.

Do you feel confident that if same-sex marriage became the norm in our society that we would get less traditional marriage?

The answer is yes, because marriage then becomes, to some degree, meaningless. I mean, if anybody can get married for any reason, then it loses its special place. And, you know, it’s already lost its special place, in many respects, because of divorce. The institution of marriage is already under assault. So why should we do more to discredit it and harm it?

Stanley Kurtz of the Ethics and Public Policy Center has written extensively about this, about what the impact is in countries that have adopted same-sex marriage. We have, in fact, seen a decline in the number of marriages, a delay in people getting married, more children being born out of wedlock and higher rates of divorce. None of those things are good for society. None of those things are good for children.

But can you lay these changes at the feet of same-sex marriage?

Yes, I think you can lay them at its feet. Kurtz notes that the marriage rate in the Netherlands was always actually one of the lowest in the EU. And once same-sex marriage was put in place, it broke below the line.

As a person who has positioned himself as a defender of Christian values, why is gay marriage particularly opposed to those values?

Well, the laws in this country are built upon a certain worldview, and it is the Judeo-Christian worldview. And that worldview has been expressed in our laws on marriage for 200-plus years. Up until 25 years ago, we would never have sat here and done this interview. It would have been beyond the pale. And so it is clearly a dramatic departure from the Judeo-Christian ethic that is reflected in our laws that say marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.

When you look ahead, do you feel optimistic that your side in this debate will ultimately prevail?

What I’ve noticed about this debate is that fewer and fewer people are stepping up and taking the position I’m taking because they see the consequences of doing so. I don’t think there is an issue that is a tougher issue for people to stand up against in American culture today than this one, both from the standpoint of the mainstream media and the popular culture condemning you for your – they can use all sorts of words to describe you – intolerant, bigot, homophobe, hater. The other side takes it personally. And so it makes it very difficult for folks to stand up and argue public policy when the other side views it as a personal, direct assault on them. So it’s very, very hard for me to be optimistic when we have a battle of ideas and one side is universally hammered for being intolerant bigots and the other side is enlightened and tolerant – which I think is false, but it is the pervasive attitude.

We know that the American public doesn’t approve of same-sex marriage, but they are uncomfortable about it because, again, the public perception is if you feel that way, you’re a bigot or a hater. And if the culture continues to send that message, if our educational system sends that message, which it does, you know, eventually the culture will change and people’s opinions will change.

The push back is what most people know: that mothers and fathers bring something unique. I mean, I have six children. I know that two mothers would not be able to give to my children what a mother and a father can give to my children. For instance, my daughter’s relationship with men is, in many respects, formed by her relationship with me. There are volumes of evidence showing that if little girls don’t have a father, it impacts their ability as adults to bond with men in healthy relationships.

What do we know, really, about children raised by same-sex couples? We’re into, in many respects, an unknown territory. There is already a difficult environment for children in America today, at least from the traditional Judeo-Christian perspective. So I think this is a fight worth fighting, even if it’s not a popular fight.

This transcript has been edited for clarity, spelling and grammar.

Sign up for our Religion newsletter

Sent weekly on Wednesday

Table of Contents

What the data says about abortion in the u.s., 8 in 10 americans say religion is losing influence in public life, how people around the world view same-sex marriage, the pope is concerned about climate change. how do u.s. catholics feel about it, across u.s. religious groups, more see decline of marriage as negative than positive, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

• Newsletters

Site search

• Israel-Hamas war
• 2024 election
• Kate Middleton
• TikTok’s fate
• Supreme Court
• All explainers
• Future Perfect

Filed under:

The strongest argument against same-sex marriage: traditional marriage is in the public interest

Share this story.

• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on Twitter
• Share this on Reddit
• Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: The strongest argument against same-sex marriage: traditional marriage is in the public interest

Opponents of same-sex marriage argued that individual states are acting in the public interest by encouraging heterosexual relationships through marriage policies, so voters and legislators in each state should be able to set their own laws.

Some groups, such as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, cited the secular benefits of heterosexual marriages, particularly the ability of heterosexual couples to reproduce, as Daniel Silliman reported at the Washington Post .

”It is a mistake to characterize laws defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman as somehow embodying a purely religious viewpoint over against a purely secular one,” the bishops said in their amicus brief . “Rather, it is a common sense reflection of the fact that [homosexual] relationships do not result in the birth of children, or establish households where a child will be raised by its birth mother and father.”

Other groups, like the conservative Family Research Council, warned that allowing same-sex couples to marry would lead to the breakdown of traditional families. But keeping marriage to heterosexual couples, FRC argued in an amicus brief , allows states to “channel the potential procreative sexual activity of opposite-sex couples into stable relationships in which the children so procreated may be raised by their biological mothers and fathers.”

To defend same-sex marriage bans, opponents had to convince courts that there’s a compelling state interest in encouraging heterosexual relationships that isn’t really about discriminating against same-sex couples.

But a majority of Supreme Court justices and most of the lower courts widely rejected this argument, arguing that same-sex marriage bans are discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Will you help keep Vox free for all?

At Vox, we believe that clarity is power, and that power shouldn’t only be available to those who can afford to pay. That’s why we keep our work free. Millions rely on Vox’s clear, high-quality journalism to understand the forces shaping today’s world. Support our mission and help keep Vox free for all by making a financial contribution to Vox today.

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

The Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision, explained

Sign up for the newsletter Today, Explained

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

Thanks for signing up!

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

Same-Sex Marriage Debate: The Arguments & Rebuttals

Here are some of the arguments espoused by those against same-sex marriage, contact pride legal.

If you or a loved one has is seeking a same-sex marriage, we invite you to  contact us at Pride Lega l for legal counseling or any further questions. To protect your rights,  hire someone who understands them .

View All News

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Same Sex Marriage Essay for Students

Introduction

The same-sex marriage has sparked both emotional and political clashes between supporters and opponents for years. Although it has been regulated through law and religion in many countries around the world, legal and social responses often range from celebration to criminalisation of the pair.

Essay No - 1

Marriage equality – importance of same sex union.

Back in 2018, the Supreme Court of India passed a watershed judgement that was ordained to go down the archives of the country’s history. In spite of the majoritarian prejudices prevalent in India directed towards the LGBT community, the apex court revoked the draconian and out-dated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. 

This Section, in typically vague and diplomatic terms, belittled homosexuality and criminalised intercourse that goes against the “laws of nature”. It was incorporated into the Indian Penal Code under the British Raj in 1861, and it took the Indian judiciary system 70 years since independence, to abrogate the law and decriminalise homosexuality. 

Nonetheless, the landmark decision was met with euphoria from its proponents, especially the activists who fought for the cause for more than a decade, wrangling with society and courts to attain equality in the eyes of the law. Even though a marriage equality essay is far from sight in a time when it is legal to marry the person one loves irrespective of their gender identity or sex, the decision by Supreme Court portends its occurrence. 

Equality in Marriage

Equality in marriage is an idea, which propagates that all marriages notwithstanding whether it is a Sapphic marriage or gay marriage or heterogeneous matrimony are equal and should enjoy similar rights and status in society.

Unfortunately, our society’s construct is such that we grow up with the idea that only a man and woman can be bound in matrimony. And while doing so, we overlook the multitudes of individuals that associate with different sexual preferences and gender identities. 

While the western world marches toward inclusive societies, where individuals are treated as equals irrespective of their sexuality or gender, we still are in the embryonic stages towards such acceptance. 

If one searches for same-sex marriage essay or statistics, one will find that support for marriage equality in countries like the USA hovers above 60%, a data presented by Pew Research Center. And if one were to rummage through the same statistics for India, it is a dismal 18%, according to a poll by Mood of the Nation (MOTN) in 2019.

Importance of Same-Sex Marriage

Because no change is appreciated until it contributes to the betterment of society in one way or another, proponents of an inclusive society have long contested its importance in same-gender marriage essays and discourses.

We are an overpopulated country and encouragement of marriage equality and an increase in same-sex matrimonies would lead to lower population growth. At the same time, it might witness a growth in adoptions of orphans, which is a significant move towards a holistic society. 

And last but not the least it would be an encouraging shift towards adherence to the laws of human rights, which dictates that no human should live under discrimination, fear, or oppression. 

The seeds of prejudice prevalent in our society, however, will not change overnight. Our traditions and social construct are vastly different from those of western societies. A change in mindset is a process that might take decades and even centuries. 

Nonetheless, the change should begin somewhere. And awareness that every human is equal and their preferences and choices about who they love and marry should not be a ground for discrimination is quintessential to that change. 

Essay No - 2

Same-gender marriage: a threat or blessing for the reunion of two people.

Marriage or wedlock is the cultural union of two people for a lifetime. Considered an integral part of one’s life, it involves both legal and social formalities performed by the two families in concern. Besides, it also comprises regulations and obligations to be followed by the spouses and their children as well as their immediate family members.

However, there have been instances where marriage equality essays have been spoken of by many. These are instances where marriage between couples of the same gender is considered inappropriate. Nevertheless, the global society is evolving and people are coming out of the closet more often than ever before.

How Does the World Perceive?

Most communities are becoming liberal in terms of being more accepting in nature. People by and large are taking a stand to abide by their sexuality. It is no more a matter of shame that has to be kept hidden or shut behind the doors.

Multiple same sex marriage essay has come up sighting the incidents where the couple were accepted by their respective families. In addition, the act of legalization of same-sex marriage has been going on since the past two decades with great vigour.

Countries like the Netherlands, Spain, and Belgium had legalised it in the wake of the 2000s, while other countries such as Canada, South Africa, and Norway followed suit in the upcoming years.

The marriage equality essay has been in the limelight because more people are opening up about the benefits and importance of such marriages in today’s world. The reasons that have fuelled such a dramatic change can be listed below as -

People can be themselves and do not have to try hard to get accepted for who they are.

They are proud of both their individuality as well as sexuality and do not have to wear a mask.

They can plan for the future instead of having to succumb to societal pressure.

Same-sex couples now have the opportunity to live with their loved ones happily, without having to take cover. 

The spread of the same gender marriage essay has been a saviour for many who were not aware of the changes that are taking place all around the world. It has not only made the LGBTQ community aware but also encouraged them to evaluate themselves and take the plunge to raise their voices too. They can now take a stand for themselves and feel relieved that they are not discriminated against anymore.

What is the Scope in the Future?

Although a significant part of the world including countries like Taiwan, Germany, USA, etc. have been able to match the steps with the advancing surrounding; there is still a section who has not. Even now, marriage equality essays and other online content create backlash.

Therefore, it is essential that more people come forward and join hands to the cause of being united in terms of accepting the bond between people. 

Essay No – 3

Same-sex marriage - the changing attitude of modern society.

Most religions and cultures accept that marriage is not a trivial matter but is a key to the pursuit of happiness. However, they still openly criticise the practice of same-sex weddings. Fortunately, the stigma related to homophobia and LGBTQ community is slowly but surely lessening. Better education, introduction to different cultures, and an open mindset played a critical role in this development. 

Let’s discuss the changing attitude of today’s society and the benefits a culture might enjoy in this same-sex marriage essay.

The History of Same-Sex Marriage

During the mid-20 th century, historian Johann Jakob Bachofen and Lewis Henry Morgan made systematic analyses of the marriage and kinship habits in different cultures. They noted that most cultures expressed support towards a heteronormative form of marriage that revolves around union between opposite-sex partners. However, all these cultures practised some form of flexibility while following these ideals. 

Scholars like historian John Boswell often declared that same-sex unions were recognised in medieval Europe, but the most notable changes were introduced during the late 20 th century. 

An Accepting Society

A more stable society was created over the years, with a better understanding of each other and acceptance for the different. As the culture opened its arms to learn about others, it also learned about minority groups such as the LGBT community. Similar to racial equality, or the equality movement for women, growing acceptance of that community ultimately made the commune much more stable. 

Many consider that same-sex unity will only benefit the homosexual community. However, it leaves a much more profound impact on the overall society. To begin with, it will reduce homophobia by a significant margin. Acknowledging a homosexual relationship will also reduce hate crimes in countries like India. There are many research papers and marriage equality essays available that show how communities that allow an individual to choose their partner to enjoy a significantly less rate of crime. 

The Economic Boost

An unlikely benefit of same-sex marriage and a compassionate society towards homosexuals is the economic boost. For one, the wedding and marriage industry is the biggest beneficiary of same-sex marriage, as it increases their customer base by a significant margin. It also allows several business providers to service them, and helps the travel and tourism industry by boosting the number of honeymoon goers.

For example, businesses in New York enjoyed almost 260 million dollars boost within a year when same-sex marriage was legalised. Similar effects were also found in other countries.

Even though India still hasn’t shaken the stigma attached to a same-sex relationship, somewhat modern society is slowly learning to accept the diversity of human nature. With the help of the government, activists, and hundreds of individuals creating and posting blogs, same-gender marriage essays on the internet, society is gradually becoming an understanding and nurturing entity for everyone.

FAQs on Same Sex Marriage Essay for Students

1. Which countries have legalized same-sex marriage and when?

With the advancement in the thought process of people, many countries have passed laws in favor of same-sex marriage, thereby legalizing it in their countries. The first countries to legalize same-sex marriage before 2010 were the Netherlands who legalized it in 2001, Belgium legalized it in 2003, Canada and Spain legalized it in 2005, South Africa in 2006, Sweden and Norway in 2009 and Iceland, Argentina, and Portugal legalized same-sex marriage in 2010. Later on, Denmark legalised it in 2012, and countries like Uruguay, New Zealand, France, and Brazil in 2013, Ireland, Luxembourg, and the United States in 2015, Colombia in 2016,  Malta, Germany, and Finland in 2017, Australia in 2018 and Ecuador and Austria in 2019. The recent country to legalize same-sex marriage is the United Kingdom. Thus, now people have started accepting the idea of same-sex marriages across the world.

2. What is the importance of same-sex marriage and why should it be legalized?

As the world is progressing we all must understand that each one of us is a human being and before labelling us with our caste and love preference, we must learn to respect each other. In this progressing era as more people with same-sex preference are coming up it has become more important to accept and legalize same-sex marriage because of the following reasons:

It will give people a chance to be themselves and enjoy their own individuality.

It will make people understand that loving a person of the same sex is not wrong or abnormal.

It will teach people that it is better for people to spend their lives with someone they love and not with the person whom they don’t even like.

This will make this place a much happier space to be in.

It gives people with homosexuality a hope of a happy life.

3. What is the status of same-sex marriage in India?

Same-sex marriage in India is still not encouraged. In India, neither the laws are lenient nor the people are broad-minded to accept it happening around them. The legal and community barriers never give these people a chance to prove themselves. Indian society is not very welcoming to changes that are different from the customs and culture they have practised till now. Thus, any change in these cultural laws gives rise to an outburst of anger in the country which makes legalising these issues even more sensitive and challenging for the law. India still needs time to get accustomed to the concept of same-sex marriage. However, not knowing about the concept is a different thing, and completely opposing it is different, therefore, awareness about such issues is very necessary for the developing countries so that people can first understand the pros and cons of it and then either accept it or reject it. Not only in India, but in other countries also, the idea of same-sex marriage is not accepted because they think it is against their religion. People opposing the LGBTQ community to get the right to marry their lovers take away the very basic human right of such people. There has been a long-lasting war for the members of the LGBTQ community for their rights. Although there have been some positive results in recent years, for example, the end of Section 377, which criminalizes homosexuality. However, India still has a long way to go in terms of the LGBTQ community and their rights.

4. What approaches can be used to legalize same-sex marriage?

Same-sex marriage is currently not taken in kind words by the people but slowly and steadily the things are changing and people are able to change their perspective with respect to the LGBT community. Legalizing same-sex marriage in a country like India where a number of religions and customs are practiced is really difficult. Therefore, few approach switch can help legalize same-sex marriage without hurting any religion are that the existing laws are interpreted in such a way that they legalize same-sex marriage, LGBT can be regarded as a different community which has customs of its own that permits same-sex marriage, making amendments in the Act itself or all the religions can individually interpret their marriage laws in such a way that same-sex marriage becomes in accordance with their religion.

5. Briefly discuss your view on same-sex marriages?

Same-sex marriage refers to the marriage of the same sex which is similar to heterosexual marriages in terms of rituals and proceedings. Same-sex marriages should not be ashamed of and are justified because after all love knows no boundaries. The community must be made aware of this concept so that they can appreciate and celebrate the union of two loving souls without considering their gender. The community as a whole must attempt to legalize and accept same-sex marriage with respect to the laws, religion, and customs of the country. In the coming years, there is a ray of hope that same-sex marriages will also be celebrated just like normal marriages in India.

share this!

March 28, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

Same-sex marriage a decade on: More choice for all couples is the best legal way forward, study argues

by Kerra Maddern, University of Exeter

An increasing number of places of worship are offering same-sex weddings, a decade on from same-sex marriage in England and Wales becoming legal, a new study shows.

Professor Rebecca Probert of the University of Exeter Law School has analyzed how the availability of religious same-sex weddings varies geographically and between religions.

She found that most Christian same-sex couples in England and Wales now have the option of marrying in a Christian ceremony if they wish, with more than a thousand churches having opted in to conduct same-sex weddings.

Of the 175 registration districts, 84% have at least one place of worship offering same-sex marriage . Same-sex weddings are also an option for Liberal and Reform Jews, Quakers, Buddhists, and Pagans.

As of September 2023, 1,018 places of worship were registered for same-sex weddings. While that is only a small percentage of the total number of registered places of worship, analysis of the nature and distribution of these places of worship suggests that most same-sex couples are now able to access a place of worship where they can marry.

The vast majority of places of worship registered for weddings belong to Christian denominations, with most being Methodist. There are 675 Methodist places of worship registered for same-sex weddings, 133 by the United Reform Church, 95 Unitarian, 63 Spiritualists and 23 Baptists. In addition, the Society of Friends has also opted in to conduct same-sex weddings, as have the relevant governing bodies of Liberal and Reform Judaism.

The study, soon to be published in the journal Child and Family Law Quarterly , also shows the number of opposite-sex couples marrying in a religious ceremony has declined sharply since 1995, when it became possible to marry in attractive venues such as stately homes and hotels.

The study warns against interpreting this decline in religious ceremonies as evidence couples are choosing to marry in a ceremony stripped of religious meaning. Many couples still lack easy access to a place of worship where they can marry in accordance with their beliefs—for example if their local church, mosque, gurdwara, or temple is not registered for weddings at all. Others might want to include hymns or prayers in their civil wedding ceremony, but this is not currently allowed. And followers of non-religious belief systems such as Humanism are unable to marry in a ceremony that reflects their beliefs.

There have been calls from some quarters for religious marriage to be outlawed completely and the introduction of "universal civil marriage," with all couples required to go through a one-size-fits-all secular ceremony.

Professor Probert's investigation found that serious issues of capacity would arise if universal civil marriage were introduced, as well as the prohibitive cost of employing registration officers to conduct tens of thousands of additional ceremonies each year.

She said, "The law governing entry into marriage in England and Wales is clearly in need of reform, but universal civil marriage is not the answer. As well as increasing costs for couples and the taxpayer, it would take away any option for a couple to marry in accordance with their beliefs, whether religious, atheist, or humanist. More choice is needed, not less."

Across England and Wales, only 28 of the 175 registration districts have no place of worship registered for same-sex weddings. This suggests most Christian same-sex couples in England and Wales will now have access to a Christian place of worship that is registered for same-sex weddings in their own registration district. Most will have a choice: 130 registration districts have more than one place of worship registered for same-sex weddings, and in 107 of these at least two of those so registered are from different denominations.

There are considerable disparities between registration districts in the provision of places of worship offering same-sex weddings. But the majority of the larger registration districts—for example those that are coterminous with counties—had multiple places of worship registered for same-sex weddings. Lancashire heads the list with 38, followed by North Yorkshire with 31 and Kent with 26.

A number of the registration districts that still lack any place of worship registered for same-sex weddings are geographically small. Over a third—Barking and Dagenham, Bexley, Brent, Hammersmith and Fulham, Haringey, Harrow, Havering, Hounslow, Southwark, and Tower Hamlets—are located in Greater London. This makes access to a place of worship in another district a realistic possibility. Under the Marriage Act 1949, a schedule can be issued to authorize a wedding outside the parties' district(s) of residence if the intended location is the usual place of worship of one or both of the parties.

Professor Probert said, "England and Wales is still a long way from achieving equal marriage for same-sex and opposite-sex couples, but there is room for some cautious optimism about the direction of travel. Given that hundreds of places of worship were registered for same-sex weddings in 2023 alone, moving to universal civil marriage would deprive same-sex couples of an option that they have only just acquired and that is hugely valued by those who have availed themselves of it."

Provided by University of Exeter

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Romania center explores world's most powerful laser

6 hours ago

A cosmic 'speed camera' just revealed the staggering speed of neutron star jets in a world first

Mar 30, 2024

Saturday Citations: 100-year-old milk, hot qubits and another banger from the Event Horizon Telescope project

Curiosity rover searches for new clues about Mars' ancient water

Study says since 1979 climate change has made heat waves last longer, spike hotter, hurt more people

Scientist taps into lobsters' unusual habits to conquer the more than 120-year quest to farm them

Mar 29, 2024

Blind people can hear and feel April's total solar eclipse with new technology

Mapping the best route for a spacecraft traveling beyond the sun's sphere of influence

Researchers outline new approach in search for dark matter through future DUNE research project

Researchers reveal evolutionary path of important proteins

Relevant physicsforums posts, how did ‘concern’ semantically shift to mean ‘commercial enterprise' , interesting anecdotes in the history of physics.

3 hours ago

Cover songs versus the original track, which ones are better?

The new shogun show, history of railroad safety - spotlight on current derailments.

Mar 27, 2024

Metal, Rock, Instrumental Rock and Fusion

More from Art, Music, History, and Linguistics

Related Stories

Small numbers of churches embrace same-sex marriage.

Nov 27, 2017

Same-sex couples denied religious marriage ceremonies, study shows

May 3, 2017

Impact of COVID-19 on weddings reinforces need for marriage law reforms

Jun 14, 2021

New study challenges common perceptions of Victorian register office weddings

May 30, 2023

Religious vows, rituals, readings and music should be allowed in civil marriage, study shows

Dec 4, 2018

Marriages in the US are back to pre-pandemic levels, CDC says

Mar 15, 2024

Recommended for you

Song lyrics have become simpler and more repetitive since 1980, study finds

Mar 28, 2024

Low resting heart rate in women is associated with criminal offending, unintentional injuries

Your emotional reaction to climate change may impact the policies you support, study finds

Survey study shows workers with more flexibility and job security have better mental health

Mar 26, 2024

We have revealed a unique time capsule of Australia's first coastal people from 50,000 years ago

Mar 25, 2024

Prestigious journals make it hard for scientists who don't speak English to get published, study finds

Mar 23, 2024

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy .

The best argument against same-sex marriage

FILIPINOS, SPORTING #LoveWins hashtags and slapping rainbows onto their Facebook profile pictures, have been swept up in the euphoria over the US Supreme Court decision declaring same-sex marriage a fundamental human right. Law professors are heartened to see Justice Anthony Kennedy’s poetic Obergefell decision shared in social media. However, we must also read the powerful dissents and ask why we might prefer that our unelected justices decide this sensitive issue instead of our elected legislators.

Inquirer 2bu quoted teenagers opining that anyone with the capacity to love deserves to have his/her chosen relationship validated. Obergefell’s logic is equally simple. Forget “substantive due process,” “decisional privacy” and “equal protection.” It takes the simple premise that human liberty necessarily goes beyond physical liberty, and includes an unwritten right to make fundamental life choices. Choosing a life partner is one such fundamental choice and the decision of two people to formalize their relationship must be accorded utmost dignity.

The typical arguments against this simple idea are so intellectually discredited that Obergefell no longer discussed them. (My Philippine Law Journal article “Marriage through another lens,” 81 PHIL. L.J. 789 [2006], tried applying them to bisexual and transgender Filipinos.)

One cannot solely invoke religious doctrine, even if thinly veiled as secular “morality.” Religious groups may confront this issue but not impose their choices on others. Their often vindictive tone contrasts sharply with Kennedy’s, and increasingly alienates millennials who revel in individuality. Those criticized as religious zealots should at least strive to be up-to-date, more sophisticated religious zealots.

The most common argument, procreation, is also the easiest to refute. Philippine Family Code author Judge Alicia Sempio-Diy wrote: “The [Code] Committee believes that marriage … may also be only for companionship, as when parties past the age of procreation still get married.”

Another argument reduces marriage to a series of economic benefits and suggests a “domestic partnership” system to govern same-sex couples’ property and other rights. This parallels having separate schools for white and black children and claiming they are equal because both have schools. It implies that some relationships so lack dignity that they must be called something else.

Protecting the “traditional” definition of marriage is too subjective. Obergefell reminds that traditional definitions evolve and once prohibited interracial and accepted arranged marriages, and “it is unrealistic to conclude that an opposite-sex couple would choose not to marry simply because same-sex couples may do so.”

Recent last-ditch arguments alleged harm to children. No party to Obergefell contested that same-sex couples may build nurturing families after adopting or tapping medical advances to produce babies with related DNA. Prohibiting same-sex marriage harms children by making such families unstable, as only one parent may legally adopt and have rights in relation to a child.

With all these discredited, the Obergefell dissents simply raised that marriage is so central a social institution that it is better redefined by democratic process than unelected judges. Proponents may consider opponents homophobic, bigoted, narrow-minded religious zealots, but none of these disqualifies one from being a citizen. Chief Justice John Roberts argued that proponents should have relied on how popular opinion was rapidly shifting in their favor than ending all debate by court order.

Justice Antonin Scalia decried how the US Constitution was turned into a “fortune cookie” in a “judicial Putsch” that declared a radical unwritten right. Roberts cautioned that the first cases to use similar doctrine upheld slavery and struck down labor regulations in the name of laissez faire economics. Although invoking human rights is not subject to an election, it is wise to consult society in defining these, and Obergefell stressed the lengthy public debates the United States experienced at every level.

One thus asks why an instant judicial solution is more appealing than backing Akbayan Rep. Barry Gutierrez’s proposed same-sex marriage bill. The Philippines has not had serious public debate given how we recently focused on reproductive health, and our high court has not even explicitly recognized “decisional privacy.” Further, the petition to legalize same-sex marriage recently filed at our high court is blatantly deficient.

The petition (like the anti-RH petitions) does not even identify a client. There is no actual Filipino same-sex couple, unlike the real Mr. Obergefell who sought to be named the spouse on his partner’s death certificate after their deathbed wedding. This violates the most basic rule that judicial power may only be used in an “actual case” and the high court should have instantly thrown out the no-case petition (like the anti-RH petitions). The petition also has glaring errors (like the anti-RH petitions). It invoked the Philippine privacy decision Ople vs Torres, which involved information in government databases and has nothing to do with the “decisional privacy” of US same-sex marriage debates. Even liberals should be hard-pressed to support this lest they be intellectually inconsistent and validate the anti-RH petitions’ worst features.

Any citizen lacking the patience to back Gutierrez’s bill has every right to short-circuit democracy by seeking an order from unelected judges. One hopes our high court insists that it be sought properly.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

React: [email protected] , Twitter @oscarfbtan, facebook.com/OscarFranklinTan.

Fearless views on the news

Disclaimer: Comments do not represent the views of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments which are inconsistent with our editorial standards. FULL DISCLAIMER

© copyright 1997-2024 inquirer.net | all rights reserved.

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.