policymakers should enact legal reforms to recognize same-sex marriage.
Gay marriage is a subject that has continued to brew heated arguments, both online and offline. Gay marriage refers to the union between a man and another man. Today, several countries across the globe are considering whether to recognize same-sex marriage legally. As of 2019, about 30 nations and regions, mostly in Europe and the US, had implemented national laws granting same-sex marriage (Masci et al., 2019). According to Kenny and Patel (2017), legalizing homosexuality improves societal attitudes and should be encouraged. They argue that while individual preferences widely vary across countries, research shows that legalizing homosexuality enhances how individuals perceive the tones of their respective communities. Based on the results of their study, the attitudes and laws towards homosexuality have significantly improved worldwide, and policymakers should enact legal reforms to recognize same-sex marriage.
In their book titled, ”What’s Wrong with Same-Sex Marriage,” Kennedy & Newcombe (2004) argue same-sex marriage is a moral issue, and the Bible clearly states marriage is for one man and one woman. Using the scriptures, statistics, and case studies, the authors emphasize homosexuality is a sin. However, they also appeal to the public to make coordinated responses towards same-sex marriage while showing a loving attitude and regarding gay people as humans too.
This essay will argue that gay marriage should be legally recognized. It will first discuss the critical arguments for the stand using evidence from the stated material and other credible reports. Further, it will also present a few counter-arguments and issue a conclusion on the subject.
In their paper titled, Norms and Reforms: Homosexuality Improves Attitudes,” Kenny and Patel (2017) examined the disparities between norms and legal rights regarding homosexuality. Their study reviewed studies about the attitudes towards gay rights in both developed and developing countries. They analyzed the evolution of traditional customs and beliefs in many countries across the world with a focus on how they relate to societal attitudes and laws. The researchers tracked down the development of values for homosexuality over time using reliable data from the Gallup World Poll and World Values Survey. One of the results of their study was that the world’s population that does not want to live next to homosexual persons has significantly declined by about 10% in the last three decades. That translates into a reduction of at least 700 million people across the world that discriminates against gays. The research also found out that as of May 2017, 72 countries criminalized same-sex activities compared to 142 countries that did not have any legal penalties for homosexual practices. Based on the data from the World Values Survey, countries with more positive beliefs towards homosexuality have higher incomes and legally recognize same-sex marriage. The study also established progress towards the legalization of same-sex marriage around the world over the same period. Those results suggest attitudes impact legal changes and, policymakers can shape public opinions regarding norms via legal reforms. They empower policymakers to use the law as a tool for reducing attitudes and actions against homosexuality and same-sex marriage.
Pope (2004) says the Catholic Church has been the most consistent and outspoken party in condemning proposals by countries and regions around the world to recognize same-sex marriage legally. According to them, marriage in this context refers to the exclusive and consensual union of spouses sanctioned by the state, which is only terminated through a legal divorce. Their report focussed on a thorough analysis and critique of the Church’s moral arguments against same-sex marriage, as indicated in the documents issued by the pope and Episcopal magisterium. They argue that although the Church actively supports the strengthening of the marriage institution, it must not issue derogatory statements against gay people. The Church’s adamant stand against same-sex marriage demeans the value of those in committed gay partnerships and ignores their needs for social justice as well as the rights for gays and their families. The authors say at the time of their report, about one-fourth of the 600,000 same-sex couples staying together in the US raised children. Gay people often live in the same houses and jointly raise children. As such, they need healthcare insurance just like the rest. Similar to heterosexuals, homosexual partners also have different sexual behaviors and beliefs in the lifelong interpersonal commitment to marriage. As such, they settle in and commit to relationships with diverse practical interdependencies just like heterosexuals. Gay couples contribute to their neighborhoods and generally aspire to become responsible members of society. Gay people are a significant and productive part of the community and, cohabiting partners merit legal recognition (Lopez, 2015).
In his book titled, ”Is It Wrong to Discriminate on the Basis of Homosexuality?”, Jordan (1995) argue that although heterosexual unions meet the threshold for state recognition in marriage, it is still not clear whether homosexual partners should have similar credit. He discusses two theories to debate the marriage rights for homosexual couples. The approaches include the parity thesis and difference thesis, which support and conflict the rights to marriage for same-sex couples, respectively. Regarding the parity thesis, the author says homosexual practices between two consenting adults inflict harm on no one. And, respecting people’s privacy and choices in harmless sexual acts improves individual freedom, which ought to be maximized. Discriminating gay people based on their homosexuality denies those personal choices and privacy that curtails individual liberties. Allowing same-sex marriage does not, in any way, force heterosexuals to engage in homosexual acts. Since homosexual acts bring pleasure to gay people and do not harm anyone, there is no moral credit to denying same-sex unions. Rejecting the proposals to sanction same-sex marriage will not make gays people vanish. Homosexual people will remain a part of society regardless of whether they receive legal recognition or not. Thus, rejecting same-sex marriage only blocks that proportion of the community from fulfilling the dream of a lifelong commitment to a loving partner, which is shared by a majority of the society (Wyers, 1987). Sanctioning same-sex marriage will go a long way in disbanding the social stigma that presents same-sex partners as pervasive and immoral. Similar to heterosexuals, homosexual couples have common life goals and strive to be happy and create a better society. Therefore, denying them the right to marry as heterosexual partners is not only morally wrong but also contributes to social injustice (Mortensen, 2020).
According to the Equality Network (2013), there should be legal recognition for same-sex marriage and, all couples should be allowed to marry regardless of their gender. In a past survey of LGBT persons, 85% supported the need for that change as 53% were positive that legalizing same-sex marriage should be accorded top priority. The report discusses the various reasons for its stance on key themes. Foremost, it addresses the issue of civil partnership, saying it was developed to prevent same-sex partners from marriage. Granting same-sex couples civil partnership does not amount to marriage; instead, it constitutes inequality. The report cites examples of discriminatory situations whereby many same-sex couples have been denied similar rights and treatments to married heterosexual partners. Such examples included homosexual couples referred to as ”not really married,” hospitals declining to recognize civil partners as next of kin. Such discriminatory treatments are partly due to the prejudice of civil partnerships on marriage. Civil partnership promotes segregation against same-sex couples, which often exhibits in the forms of bullying and hate crimes. The discrimination not only affects the couples but, also their children. The report estimates that about 20% of same-sex couples have kids, either from past mixed-sex relationships, adoption or assisted conception. Further, it points out that multiple studies show kids do as well with two same-sex parents as with two opposite sex parents. Introducing same-sex marriage would help with reducing such kinds of prejudice by recognizing homosexual people and other same-sex couples as an equal members of society. That will consequently promote the self-esteem, safety, health and overall wellbeing of same-sex partners (Van Der Geest, 1993).
It is wrong for any religious or humanist to solemnize the relationships between same-sex couples. Freedom of relligion advocates respecting the rights of the institutions that wish to solemnize same-sex unions as well as the rights of the partners that wish relligious bodies should approve same-sex marriage. It also emphasizes respecting the rights of those religious organizations that dissapprove same-sex marriage and refuse to perform them. However, no relligious institution bears the right to impose its views regarding same-sex marriage on the other. Marriage predates any relligious belief and therefore, no relligion should possess veto over marriage arrangements. While the definitions and impacts of marriage have enormously changed over the past years, introducing same-sex marriage will not in any way alter the legal propositions for state-sanctioned mixed-sex unions (Nussbaum, 2009). Same-sex marriage has continued to garner strong support, especially among the young population. In terms of public opinion, many political parties across the globe are advocating the introduction of same-sex marriage. For example, in their 2011 Holyrood manifestos, the Scottish Liberal Democrats and Scottish Green Party included pledges to enact laws that allow same-sex marriage (Equality Network, 2013). Introducing same-sex marriage will not only promote equality but, also respect to human rights across the world. Besides, there is no evidence from the countries that have legalized same-sex marriage to suggest negative consequences of those unions. In a past study that sought to determine the public health implications of same-sex marriage, Buffie (2011) found out that the social and legal recognition of same-sex marriage positively impacts the health status and overall wellbeing of the community.
Despite the above propositions of legal recognition for gay marriage, there are also multiple counter arguments that reject same-sex unions. In ”What’s Wrong with Same-Sex Marriage,” Kennedy & Newcombe (2004) strive to prove that homosexuality and marriage between gay couples is morally wrong based on the Scriptures, past case studies and statistics. They offer a Christian response to the issue of same-sex marriage, asserting that the Bible clearly says marriage is between a man and a woman, and homosexuality is a sinful act. The authors argue that although today’s culture stipulates it is politically incorrect to condemn homosexuality, culture is not respnsible for determining what is wrong and right. In their opinions, only one authority which is God can do that and, it is up to Christians to uphold the teachings of the Scriptures. They say the legal recognition of same-sex marriage encourages homosexuality, which is not only morally wrong but, also taints the holy institution of marriage. Same-sex marriage negates the Biblical teachings that define marriage as the holy matrimony between one man and one woman. Rajczi (2008) echoes similar sentiments that legalizing homosexuality goes against the societal moral standards.
According to Koppelman (2014), most opponents of same-sex marriage argue on the basis of defending the family, saying the legal recognition of such unions would undermine the institution of the family. The tolerance to homosexuality and same-sex unions by the society prejudices heterosexual families. The report gives an example of a past survey that established about half of the American population are against same-sex marriage. The survey also found out that two fifths of the population consider homosexuality as morally wrong. Maggie Gallager says allowing same-sex marriage equals to affirming that children do not need fathers and mothers, and that marriage is not concerned with babies. In her view, the state’s endorsement of gay marriage would impact increased poverty and depression resulting from kids growing without mothers and fathers (Lister, 2015). In a separate report, Boonin (1999) says a majority of the public disgaree with homosexuality, citing it pervets moral behavior. Homosexuals are highly likely to commit other immoral acts as child molestation and infidelity. Some studies cite evidence suggesting children raised by homosexual parents are more likely to experience sexual and gender-related disorders. Others also claim legalizing same-sex unions would hinder the procreative role of marriage and undermine the element of paternal committment (Family Research Council, 2020).
Conclusion
The above discussion clearly shows widely divided opinions on whether states and territories around the world should legally recognize same-sex marriage. However, it also establishes a significant improvement in the attitudes and reforms towards homosexuality and same-sex unions. Many countries have already enacted laws and several others are considering granting gay couples the rights to marry (Felter & Renwick, 2019). While opponents of same-sex marriage cite moral issues and other consequential implications, most of the arguments lack the backing of credible evidence. The public has a right to criticize same-sex marriages but, such criticism should not amount to acts of discrimination against homosexuals. The legal recognition of same-sex marriage will promote equality and respect to human rights as well as boost the safety and self-esteem of homosexual couples and, other same-sex partners facing greater risks of discrimination. Despite their different sexual behaviours, homosexual couples stay together, raise children, commit to lifelong relationships and make valuable contributions to society as heterosexual partners. Thus, the legal recognition of gay marriage should be a priority for every state and territrory in the modern world.