essays on gay marriage debate

Gay marriage is a controversial issue that attracts numerous reactions from those advocating and those opposing the vise. The issue regarding whether lesbian and gay marriages attracts heated debate. In the societal setting, certain individuals believe that homosexuality is immoral while gay advocates believe that putting into consideration the sexual preferences of every individual is essential. To the latter group of people, lesbians and homosexuals should have similar civil rights, including marrying anybody, one wishes. This piece presents two sides of arguments regarding pros and cons of gay marriage. To begin with, advocates for gay marriage argue that denying a couple the right to marry any person of their choice regardless of their sexes is immoral since they are denied some of the basic right. This is because when an individual is unable to marry, there are certain rights that they cannot enjoy. Some of these rights, which only the married couples enjoy that include visitation rights when one partner is admitted in hospital, health care, social security and joint tax benefits. Sullivan asserts that nevertheless, the fight for equal rights does not essentially focus on the access to benefits only, but rather focus on ensuring that gay and lesbian couples proclaim their love and commitment to one another in a similar manner the heterosexual couples always enjoy. Gay marriage supporters believe that allowing same-sex marriages guarantees the couples some legal and economic security. Additionally, when the government encourages same-sex marriage, it is simply strengthening the relationship between couples. According to Rauch people against gay marriage affirm the act is immoral, and allowing gay marriages is likely to increase the divorce rates. Besides, those opposing same-sex marriage purport that gays and lesbians are likely to taint the long-standing.
Image Credit: Jennifer W., St. Albans, WV Gay marriage should be legalized because it is uncivilized and unmerited. Our civil rights and the Constitution give us many liberties. One of our civil liberties is the pursuit of happiness, which homosexual people are not allowed to chase. They cannot be married to the person they love and it violates their freedoms. According to professorshouse.com, “In Alaska, Nevada, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Nebraska, Missouri, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Kansas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas, and Alabama, not only is gay marriage banned, but so are civil partnerships.” Others might ask why gay marriage should be legalized, but my question is this: why should other people be able to choose who marries who? If a man and a woman get married, no one seems to care. They are two people who feel affection for one another and those two people want to start a family. If we change the scenario a little bit and a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, try to get married it causes uproar. They are not allowed to be married or raise a family together. Imagine waking up one day to a world that was completely opposite from the world we went to sleep in, meaning gay people are now straight and all straight people are now gay. Do you think the newly straight people would fight for the newly homosexual people’s rights? America is the land of the free, but we are not free to marry whomever we would like. After everything straight people have put homosexual people through, in this scenario, homosexual people would most likely vote for their rights because they would want their rights to be voted for. We are equals in this world whether we are Black, White, Hispanic, Indian, or any other race for that matter. Why should we not be equals based on sexual orientation? The 1st amendment of the Constitution states that a.
Getty/Getty Images Same-sex couple Ariel Owens (R) and his spouse Joseph Barham walk arm in arm after they were married at San Francisco City Hall June 17, 2008 in San Francisco, California. It started in 1989.  Andrew Sullivan wrote a cover story for The New Republic arguing for gay marriage. It was at the time a radical proposition — although Sullivan's argument came from a philosophically conservative place.  This was a key paragraph:  Legalizing gay marriage would offer homosexuals the same deal society now offers heterosexuals: general social approval and specific legal advantages in exchange for a deeper and harder-to-extract-yourself from commitment to another human being. Like straight marriage, it would foster social cohesion, emotional security, and economic prudence. Since there’s no reason gays should not be allowed to adopt or be foster parents, it could also help nurture children. And its introduction would not be some sort of radical break with social custom. As it has become more acceptable for gay people to acknowledge their loves publicly, more and more have committed themselves to one another for life in full view of their families and their friends, A law institutionalizing gay marriage would merely reinforce a healthy social trend. It would also, in the wake of AIDS, qualify as a genuine public health measure. Those conservatives who deplore promiscuity among some homosexuals should be among the first to support it. Burke could have written a powerful case for it. There is plenty of history of the gay marriage movement before Sullivan's essay, but his advocacy helped bring it in to the mainstream. In a post on his blog, The Daily Dish, Sullivan recalls a moment debating gay marriage on TV shortly after his essay came out. It was Crossfire, as I recall, and Gary Bauer’s response to my rather earnest argument after my TNR cover-story on the matter.
1.0 Introduction Gay marriage is one of the most controversial issues in the modern world. For the past thousand years, marriage has been recognized as the social union between a man and a woman. In most cultures across the globe, homosexuality was viewed with disdain, and marriages between same-sex couples were forbidden. However, homosexual relationships are slowly gaining acceptance, as homosexuals have become vocal in fighting their right to marry in the early 90s. With an increased in tolerance for homosexuality in the society, the controversy over the legalization of gay marriage has been disputed among people in many nations. While the majority of the population believes that the legalization of gay marriage will have negative impact on the society, gay activists claim that it is against basic civil rights to prohibit them from marrying. This report will first review the history of battle to legalizing gay marriage, and the current status in today’s world. It will then examine the reasons for and against the legalization of gay marriage. The conclusion will summarize the main arguments 2.0 Overview of gay marriage 2.1 History Same-sex marriage is nothing new, with historical evidence showing that marriage has not always been the institution between heterosexuals. Gay marriages have existed in some form around 600 years ago. (Tulchin, 2007) Since early 1960’s, gay activists have been striving for the right to marry. However, the issue of gay marriage only arose from the 1990’s, as three same-sex couples filed a lawsuit against the state of Hawaii for the prohibition of gay marriage in US. The case has come to a conclusion that banning gay marriage is not constitutional, as there is no real practical reason and compelling arguments for it. (Bower, 2010) This event had triggered the world’s attention over the next decade and consequently led to the creation and.
Persuasive Essay on Same Sex Marriage There has been a lot of conflict concerning the topic of same sex marriage. Most states have ruled it unconstitutional, and some have disagreed. But what really is the solution to this problem? Show people really are penalized for expressing their true feelings? I honestly think that same sex marriage isn’t a crime and if all expressions are not banned, why should this? The United States focuses on giving all people equal rights, which gives people the right of privacy, “freedom of speech”, and freedom and religion. This law also gives each citizen the freedom from religion. However, when the topic of gay marriage comes up, the main contrasting point would be that the bible does not agree with it. According to the first amendment, the bible has no standing in American law. Opposing gay marriage, in my opinion is just another form of bias. This argument is not different from the one half a century ago, when it was thought almost inconceivable for an African American(“colored”) to share the same water fountain, or ride next to “whites” on a bus. On a common sense level, do American citizens really think that if a gay marriage is not allowed, the gay citizens are going to stop/change their way of life? Everyone has their own ways of expressing their feelings for others. Fairly, it is something beyond our control. Banning same sex marriage will not hinder the growth of the same sex marriage couples, because feelings are not physical features, they are mental. People who are against same-sex marriage say that it should not be legalized so as “to protect traditional marriage and the traditional family”. Protect it from what, of course? What is so dangerous about same sex marriage that we have to protect “normal” marriage? Same sex marriage isn’t a war. Same sex marriage is basically like any other “normal” marriage. It’s an expression.