Same-sex marriage
Same-sex marriage has become a national concern among many countries; a growing number of states have been debating whether to legalize same-sex marriage. The idea of legalizing same-sex marriage has been one of the primary political agenda for several years, the broader debate being having legal recognition. Even though there has been varied opinion, same-sex marriage is still a complex and controversial topic worldwide.
Same-sex marriage is a union between two women or men, and this is one of the topics that continue to spark emotional debate between those who support its legalization and those who oppose this practice. Same-sex unions have been regulated by law in several countries, and legalizing this practice has been most contested debates. Several states have attempted to legalize same-sex marriage, but have faced stiff opposition.
Critiques of same-sex marriage argue that marriage, as defined in the bible, should be between one man and one woman (Browne, and Jean Nash 59). Altering this natural law will be undermining the marriage institution and also the function of the family woman (Browne, and Jean Nash 59). Proponents argue that everyone deserves equal rights, and a civilized society should not discriminate against people on race, religion, and sexuality, thus denying some sections of individual marriage rights is an act of discrimination woman (Browne, and Jean Nash 63).
Same-sex marriage has become a divisive agenda in America, as supporters define marriage from a civil rights perspective. They believe that the institution of marriage is distinct. Marriage is about sexual relations, friendship, love, procreation, mutual responsibility, and childbearing. For them, same-sex marriage can also have all these aspects (Siegel 1722). they argue that opposing same-sex marriage means denying gays and lesbians civil rights since unmarried people cannot access favorable tax reliefs; they cannot inherit property (Siegel 1723). Not legalizing same-sex marriages is denying these people their rights, such as adoption and custody and right to healthcare (Siegel 1723). For them, this is discrimination because, in a same-sex marriage, people engage in sexual relations and still have children through artificial methods or can adopt the can raise children; thus, they have the right to enjoy equal civil rights(Siegel 1725).
Those who support same-sex marriage contend that these couples should not be discriminated they should be treated like heterosexuals. The government needs to uphold the principle of non-discrimination and equality by legalizing same-sex marriage (Browne, and Jean Nash 64). Supporters of same-sex marriage argue that homosexuals have been denied their civil rights because they do not enjoy government privileges like heterosexuals who have legally married, especially health care services and pension benefits.
A growing number of movements exist to support same-sex marriages; they have, for a long time, advocated for its legalization; for example, the gay movement in America compelled the court to formalize same-sex marriages in the early 1960s(Browne, and Jean Nash 66). However, recently the pressure by these movements has turned the issue to be a national concern. The debate about legalizing same-sex marriage was sparked by the Supreme Court in Hawaii in 1993 after the court ruled against banning same-sex marriage, making it unconstitutional (Browne, and Jean Nash 63). According to the Supreme Court, the state government needs to have a compelling reason for discriminating those who are in same-sex relationships by denying their civil rights.
Even though the court’s decision did not legalize same-sex marriage, it sparked a nationwide protest from various groups. After this ruling, there have been several attempts by those who support same-sex unions to fight or their rights. As a result, more than 40 states passed new laws known as the Defense Marriage Act to clearly defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman (Browne and Jean Nash 60). These are some of the few attempts by those opposing same-sex marriages to protect the constitution room been unfiltered with different ideas.
One the other hand, religious groups in America are equally divided on the issues of same-sex marriage. Even though the Catholic church strongly condemns this practice openly opposing same-sex marriage (Djupe, Lewis and Jelen 632). The protestant churches and other religious organization which are non-Catholics have been battling whether to support same-sex marriages since some of their members are gays and lesbians. For a long time, the Catholic church had been on the lead to oppose same-sex unions as they believe that God institutes marriage. According to Christians, marriage is a lifetime union between one man and one woman who come together to love each other. Marriage is about commitment and having the mutual responsibility of bringing up children and caring for them like God’s children (Browne, and Jean Nash 61).
Others opposing same-sex marriage argue that marriage between a man and a woman is the foundation of a healthy society since such marriage is instituted by natural laws (Browne, and Jean Nash 59). Therefore, those who get into such unions are committed, thus leads to stable families, which ultimately results in producing children who grow up in a safe environment to become productive adults in the future. For them allowing same-sex marriage is more life redefining what marriage is. Thus, such a new definition of marriage undermines the primary purpose of marriage and weakens the family as an institution. Opponents further argue that if same-sex marriages were to be legalized, this means that other nontraditional relationships like polygamy will be recognized (Browne, and Jean Nash 62). Opponents of same-sex marriage rely on the belief that marriage is more of a religious rite than just a civil right. Thus, same-sex marriage is a sin.
The idea that same-sex marriages cannot procreate has been a common argument among opponents of this union. They assert that children need to live with both their biological mother and father, and legalizing same-sex marriage will break down families (Browne, and Jean Nash 57). It is in the best interest that children need to be raised by their parents. They cite some of the difficulties orphans and single parents and foster parents face in raising children to argue that such unions should not legally be recognized (Djupe, Lewis and Jelen 637). Besides, they believe that if same-sex marriage were to be legal, a child from the same-sex union would be deprived of one of the parents, wither the mother or father; thus, they condemn this practice.
Both argument in support and those who oppose same-sex marriage present differing opinion that makes the topic controversial. The idea of legalizing gay or lesbian marriages is endless because of the varied views of the definition of marriage. Those who support this marriage argue from a civil right perspective, while those opposing the practice rely on religion. Thus they cannot agree on whether to legalize same-sex marriage or not.
Works Cited
Browne, Kath, and Catherine Jean Nash. “Resisting marriage equalities: The complexities of
religious opposition to same-sex marriage.” Spaces of Spirituality. Routledge, 2018. 51-
67.
Djupe, Paul A., Andrew R. Lewis, and Ted G. Jelen. “Rights, reflection, and reciprocity:
Implications of the same-sex marriage debate for tolerance and the political
process.” Politics and Religion 9.3 (2016): 630-648.
Siegel, Reva B. “Community in conflict: same-sex marriage and backlash.” UCLA L. Rev. 64
(2017): 1728.