Why should Homosexuality or Homosexual Marriage be illegal?
This is a perspective debate for the primary reason that I wanted to find out why most people think that gayness should be illegal. IF you feel that it should not, DO NOT POST HERE. Thanks!
|
I refuse not to respond to a public debate on the basis of one trying to find a reason "most" agree with an act that is obviously discriminatory. But in the spirit of debate, I would say the only reason gay marriage could be Constitutionally or morally ever "illegal" is if all marriage were illegal. That is if the government separated itself from a strictly religious ceremony, as the Constitution itself defines should be its role in all religion. As it is though, government and religion are certainly and painfully not "separate" in the instance of marriage. And as such, to deny one group of tax-paying, sound of mind, consenting adults a right afforded the rest of the population is very much Unconstitutional and morally un-defendable. And frankly, that so many are so quick to object to another expressing their love in some silly ceremony even though it does not affect them in the least is sickening - as if god is going to give them a cookie for their self-righteous ideological spewings. Either make marriage between any consenting adults legal, or get rid of marriage. Those are the only two ways to resolve this blatant discrimination. It's really about acceptance by the straight community of this very traditionally straight idea. Firstly, marriage is not just a word or what happens on the day. The idea of marriage comes before the term "marriage", not the other way around: it's about male-female courtship with the intention of staying together forever to bear children with each other and then seeing your children go through the same process and perhaps your grandchildren. Humans all over the world regardless of religion or culture have come to embrace this idea of relationship and call it marriage. Now gay people are doing it backwards: they see the word "marriage" created by the straight community and they want to apply it to their relationships. Dictionary definitions can be changed easily enough, but people's minds is what's really important here, after all that's what acceptance is really about. This is quite hard to achieve because while most people in this modern age will not care about your sexual orientation, a lot of them still care about the entire idea of marriage and how it is meant to be. I'm quite happy to attend a party where 2 gay people publicly declare love for each other and sign a marriage certificate, but I won't be thinking about their union the same way I think about a union between 2 straight people. I think that's really what the problem is. That's the reason why some will prefer that another term be used for gay unions. I totally support, encourage and endorse monogamous relationships that lasts a lifetime and I don't care if you're straight or gay. Why it matters so much to gay people that their unions be legally accepted as "marriage" is beyond me, I mean I don't even care about marriage and I'm straight. Do you get more rights or something after you get married??? Do you get more rights or something after you get married??? Yes, you do. 1. hospital visitation 2. joint tax filing 3. inheritance issues 4. health coverage There are many more. All of that. And plus there is the whole thing, why does anyone who is not gay care what gay people call getting married? One has to be incredibly homophobic if they truly believe that a gay couple calling their arrangement with their partner the same thing as a straight couple, somehow makes their straight arrangement "gay." Either that or they themselves are in the closet. Which is my theory about everyone who is against gay people getting married. The only reason why anyone in my opinion could argue that Homosexual Marriage should be illegal is that marriage was something defined by the bible. And although I personally believe in allowing Homosexual marriage, I can see why someone would argue that is it supposed to be between a man and a woman. I think that just to stop these arguments someone should come up with a title for homosexual marriage. My stand on it is this. I have no problem with Homosexuals being together, but the term marriage should not be used in the case of gay and lesbian marriages. Marriage is a sacred promise defined as (by Webster): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law. Just now is same-sex being added as a definition. So by old English law, this term only is represented by the opposite sex... why are we changing a words meaning for a minority? So no, it shouldn't be illegal, but it shouldn't be called marriage. 4
points
According to the unanimous supreme court decision, Loving v. Virginia, marriage is a fundamental right. By denying this right to a number of Americans, based on their sexual orientation, we have a law that is discriminitory. Your argument seems to be that since marriage has always been between a man and a woman, it should remain that way; however, just because something has always been a certain way, does not mean that it cannot, or should not be changed. Were this the case then we would still have slavery, women wouldn't be able to vote, etc... Obviously for progress to occur, we have to reexamine, and often make adjustments to existing institutions. 2
points
1
point
|
