Gay marriage Essay

The sanctioning of rattling pairing is a incorrupt way forward and has dictatorial bulge out baffles in all aspects of life. quirk it seems is a current concept in terms of todays news, particularly as the legalization of cheery marriages atomic number 18 now at the chief of todays current issues. The facts are, transgenderity is non a modern concept or a modern way of life, from as farthermost back as history will allow us to upset it is believed that homo perk upuality in men has always existed. M all ancient writers, much(prenominal) as Strabo and Athenaeus, wrote that the Gauls or Celts commonly practiced homo wake upuality.Aristotle wrote that the Celts establishly held in reward passionate friendship (synousia) amidst males. Diodorus Siculus wrote that Although the Gauls de vitalr esteemly women, they scarcely hire attention to them, but strangely crave male embraces (arrenon epiplokas). (Norton) As we invite extendd through the centuries and certainly more towards the end of the last atomic number 6 and into this sensation, it has become a lesser taboo subject than it once was. The media has brought to our attention, positive and sometimes negative reactions to quite a little who practice same sex consanguinitys. tied(p) celebrities fork up, in some ways, brought about a wider recognition of homo cozy doings and thankfully this has allowed a certain extent of acceptance. The familiarity of reading and viewing such(prenominal) issues has enabled a greater reception and a recognized tolerance for the gay community. From a libertarian point of view, we are discouraged and prohibited from causing any racial or discriminatory behaviour towards others be more open minded towards differing lifestyles and opinions, and this should non be any different towards homosexuals, or those seeking to give in into a gay marriage.Ostracizing homosexuals only leads to and breeds a misunder stand up and a promotion of discrimination. Homose xuals do not choose to belong this way out of defiance or rebellion they are born this way and should not be made to feel victimized. A further hindrance in the fight for legalization is the concept that allowing such only whenification would give authorisation to those individuals having the need to marry their pets or walk down the aisle with their swagger up dolls. This argument is preposterous as in the first sheath thither send packing never be an entry into marriage between any beast and a human.The beast has no ability to let loose and cannot then agree to marriage, the same goes for a doll or any animate object. It is difficult enough in this day and age to keep open any kind of relationship and being involved in a gay relationship is no different, mayhap in some cases it is harder, tho as nine has struggled to come to terms with this behaviour, it should be reminded that any relationship, if it is a healthy relationship, is a good relationship regardless of who i s involved and their elect sexuality.The legalization of gay marriages will support and promote homosexuality and this should be regarded in a positive way for all those concerned. Studies repeatedly question that people who marry tend to be better off financially, emotionally, psychologically, and crimson medically. (Cline) A communatarian standpoint would be that though the above concentrates solely on the personal benefits, the same can be realised when considering the families of gay pits and the communities they live in.The acceptance and legalization of their unity promotes a healthy attitude and has a constructive ascertain on others, consequently this influence creates routine, stability, positive grapheme models and a preferred society to live in. Homosexuals are not harming any star with their intentions of marriage, it is just the next level of their relationship and they should not be denied this as their right. When your organization puts into place laws that pre vent people from being equal they set the horizontal surface for those who discriminate to feel justified. (Hosty) Legal classification has and can be channeld society and tradition have changed without the need for a legal approval then there seems no reason to uph senile the argument. It has been said that homosexuality weakens the interpretation of marriage and that the belief and crusade for legalization will encourage and sum up fake marriages. Yet who is to conjecture that this does not occur in uninterrupted person marriages. Attempting to pocket homosexuals into this category of behaviour is a poor attempt of a weak argument and should be disregarded when looking for blame in this area.The procreation debate is another common case of contention, many accept that marriage should then result in reproduction and in endorsing homosexual behaviour the human race will suffer. Homosexuals do not influence heterosexual people there will not come a time when there are no het erosexuals left due to homosexuals. Homosexuality is not a recruitment agency. It is not clear why straight people would stop procreating if gays could marry.The factor outs driving people to reproduce the needs for love and to love another, the purported instinct to propagate ones genes, religious obligations would as yet exist if Adam and Steve could marry. No couple has ever been infallible to manifold in order to marry. No couple has ever even been required to be able to procreate in order to marry. Sterile couples and old couples can marry. Couples physically able to procreate but who do not want to procreate can get married. (Carpenter)Tradition and family values have also featured in the arguments against gay marriage, yet the world seems to be content to bring in technological and other kind customs. No laws have been introduced to prevent heterosexual couples from living together distant of marriage, nor have there been any actions taken against single, heterosexua l women adopting children, yet when it comes to homosexuals and the idea of them de jure binding their love, this is un congenial. According to The Bible it clearly condemns all sexual ports outside of marriage between one man and one muliebrity.Homosexual behavior is explicitly condemned in both the Old and New Testaments as an odium and a violation of Gods standards for sexuality. (Coalition) Yet this is not a law, it is a book of beliefs, a book that many people have to believe in, yet fail to live by its words. Only choosing what is to accommodate personal purpose is this referred to. Many people, who claim to believe in The Bible, and its beliefs in respect of homosexuals, do not take into account their own lives and that perhaps they flout the Books scriptures.None of us live perfect lives, yet there are numerous bigoted people who drive for the argument against something as inoffensive as a homosexual couple showing their love. statistically speaking it is known that ho mosexuals live 20 years less than heterosexuals therefore the argument continues that legalization would be encouraging an unhealthy lifestyle. Numerous conflicts fetch homosexual behaviors abnormal, including rampant promiscuity, inability to maintain commitment, psychiatric disorders and medical illnesses with a shortened life span.The sexual practices of homosexuals involve serious health risks and illness. Specifically, anal intercourse as a sexual behavior is associated with significant and life-threatening health problems. Unhealthy sexual behaviors occur among both heterosexuals and homosexuals. Yet the medical and social science evidence indicate that homosexual behavior is uniformly unhealthy. hands having sex with other men leads to greater health risks than men having sex with women, not only because of promiscuity but also because of the nature of sex among men. (Fitzgibbons)Heterosexuals also live unsavory lifestyles drug users, criminals and sexual predators all com e in different shapes, sizes, gender and color, being homosexual is not in the beginning unhealthy and if society were to accept this lifestyle more readily, perhaps the gay community may adapt their lifestyles and take less risks. A engaging and stable relationship, albeit a homosexual one, generates maturity and respective values towards one another. Throughout history there have been many definitions of marriage. Usually A legally recognized union of a man and a woman by ceremony or common law.(Services) but more deep this has been generalized to identify marriage as two people who are married to each other. The emphasis being on the word people implies that there has been an easing of attitude, therefore why would this definition change? If marriage is indeed meant only for procreation purposes, why are infertile couples allowed to enter into marriage when there will be no child borne from the relationship? in that respect are heterosexual couples who have married in by and by life, with no desire for children and they do not come across such obstacles when making their decision.From a utilarian aspect, a child will only develop positively in a loving and stable relationship this can take place in a homosexual relationship just as well as in a conventional relationship. There will always be a form of resistance where change is involved. Fear of the unknown, lack of knowledge and more importantly, ignorance will all factor in this struggle to change peoples opinions. The legalization of a gay marriage should not be about the sexuality of the couple it should be about recognizing and celebrating a couples love for one another. conjugal unions have changed erratically over the years, respectively considered to be uncool or unnecessary. In the past it was thought to be sinful to live with a partner and not enter into marriage, yet our views of this have changed. It is perfectly acceptable to have multiple partners and to cohabit with your chosen partner y et when it comes to those individuals who chose to live together and get married from the same sex, this is not acceptable. There are innumerable slippery slope theories that have no ultimate guts to their arguments.Anyone it seems, no matter what they engage in, be it any kind of sexual deviance, religious beliefs, personal lifestyle choice, they are given permission to say I do, however, if those same people were to be homosexual, their permission would not only be denied but they would suffer judgment and prejudice from those standing court. A persons future happiness should not be determined by small minded and judgemental bureaucrats. It may be a more hardheaded method to way up the statistics of the general public as they are, subsequently all, the majority of the society we have to live in.The statistics overleaf highlight the certainty that there seems to be an opposition from the middle aged generation, unable to move on from tradition and their political persuasions. ( Times) Carpenter, Dale. Independent festal Forum human being spousal and Procreation. 18 work on 2004. 20 March 2008 . Cline, August. Gay Rights, Marriage & Homophobia Ethical & Political Issues Arguments for Gay Marriage Moral and Social Arguments for Gay Marriage. 20 March 2008 . Coalition, The Traditional Values. Traditional Values Defined What atomic number 18 Traditional Values? 20 March 2008 . Fitzgibbons, Rick. Medical Downside of Homosexual Behavior. 18 September 2003. 20 March 2008 . Hosty, John. Live, Love, and Learn. 12 December 2005. 20 March 2008 .Norton, Rictor. Taking a Husband A History of Gay Marriage Queer Culture. 21 February 2004 (amended 2006). 20 March 2008 . Services, Department of homo. Department of Human Services. 20 March 2008 . Times, The Seattle. Rogue Pundit Statistics, Gay Marriage and able Rights. 28 March 2004. 20 March 2008 . hhhh