Should gay marriage be legal? Essay
Gay marriage should be legal because as woman and man, all individuals have the same right in society; because same-sex couples can constitute a good based family; because it is just a way to make official a common union nowadays, even with the religious issue; because it is not related to polygamy; and because love matters and it does not differ in nature according to the sex of its object or the person who experiences it.
The first reason why same sex marriage should be legal is because it is fair for all individuals to have the same rights in society. With the end of sodomy laws, a recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, conservatives have lost their last excuse to write off gay lives and love as unworthy of social accommodation.
But whatever ones feel about the reasoning of the decision, its results is clear: gay Americans are no longer criminals. Even if they were, as murderers on death row that have the constitutional right to marriage, they should have too.
The second objection about why same sex marriage should be legal is because a same sex couple can really constitute a good based family, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics that has recognized that gay households can be just as loving and supportive an environment for raising children as the straight kind. Opponents think that a gay couple family is not a good alternative for children raise and they believe gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents just raise straight children. Nevertheless it is not true because human sexual choice is both unchangeable and unchosen. Whether it is biologically or genetically determined as demonstrated in the study of the professor of psychiatry of Boston University School of Medicine, Richard pillar, or simply set at a very young age; sexual orientation does not respond to social influences designed to lead it in a different direction.
Homosexuals are not created by seduction, recruitment or propaganda. And more, there is no evidence that the relative acceptance of homosexuality in the Netherlands and Belgium, both which recognize gay marriage, has caused an increase in the number of homosexuals. Gay marriage will not increase the number of homosexuals, but it will increase levels of happiness among existing homosexuals.
In addition gays and lesbians marriage should be legal because it is just a way of the State recognize these common unions now days. It happens independent of the law and the religious topic involved, and if the government can not be left out of same sex marriage issue, the better thing that should be done was legalize it. The Vatican says homosexual acts do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity .
Actually the real reason the Vatican opposes gay marriage is that its goal is to press the governments to “contain the phenomenon” of homosexual sex. But it is a vague argument since homosexuals, as straight people, almost always choose someone whose difference from themselves makes them admirable, exciting or interesting in some way. So, “affective complementarity” applies just as well to gay marriage.
The fourth reason why the gay marriage should be legal is because it does not infer polygamy. Gay marriage makes sense because it meets an essential need for the individuals involved and it also benefits society. Poligamy, by contrast, does neither.
Some people affirm that if they take the step of allowing gay marriages they will slide down a slippery slope to polygamy. But, there is no obvious principle supporting gay marriage that will lead people to accept multi-partner marriage. One possible theory uniting the two is that gay marriage, like polygamous marriage extends marriage beyond partners who may procreate as partners. But that doesn’t work because procreation is already not a requirement of marriage and sterile opposite-sex couples have already taken that step down the slope for homosexual couples. Actually any proposal for the expansion of gay marriage must be good both for the individuals involved and for the society in which they live, and the case for polygamous marriage is distinguishable and weaker on both counts. Considering that to satisfy individual needs is not the principle supporting .
