Example of same-sex marriage argumentative essay

A question about same-sex marriage is becoming one of the most debated and controversial topics in modern society. More and more countries start to recognize it legally but is it an evidence of freedom and tolerance or decrease of society’s moral values? Same-gender marriage proponents criticize people with different point of view, claiming them as narrow-minded and bigoted, labeling them as “ homophobic”. I think that same-sex marriages are unnatural and wrong from the view of morality, ethics, and religion. Let’s see why it is so and what is on this side of the issue.
The institution of family is one of the most solid pillars which hold society, one of its core institutions. Sadly, according to the statistics marriage as an institution is already struggling and almost half of all of marriages end up with a divorce. Legalization of the same-sex marriages only prompts this tendency, ruining the image of traditional family, going against the “ natural law”. It shows that family values start to fade, ethics is being underestimated, and moral standards of the 21st century person are changing for worse, going back to depraved norms of Roman times. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman; do we really want to change this definition? Abandon hundreds of years of western tradition? Of course homosexuality exists and this is not an issue anyone can change. This is something we have to accept as a fact. Homosexuals should not by any means be considered to be a “ second sort”, homosexuality is not a disease or pathology, but legalization of same-sex marriage means its social approval and encouragement, official change of family concept. Some opponents say that legal recognition of same-sex marriage was one of the primary factors of collapse in marriage rates in the countries where the law is already passed.
Looking at the issue from the legal point of view every human being should be equally treated by law. According to Jack McKinney ” marriage is such a basic civil right that no state is justified in denying this right to people based on discriminatory classifications” (282). Advocates of the issue say that homosexuals seem to have only a partial citizenry status in modern society just like African American and women at some point of our history. They claim us to have created a class of citizen with unequally low status in comparison to the rest. But is it the way it really is? Don’t they also limit freedom of people who surround them forcing different standards upon them? The argument is not whether civil rights for homosexuals exist, without any doubts they do. The question is rather: “ What should be іncluded into the list of those rights?” Same-sex couples face many legal difficulties which normal spouses take for granted, for instance they may struggle with insurance and inheritance rights, visitation in hospitals, etc. because of all of these difficulties alternative forms of marriage, such as civil union or domestic partnership become more widely spread.
Proponents of the same-sex marriage see its legal recognition as an evolution of marriage but is it indeed an evolution but not degradation? It contradicts marriage’s core concept. Homosexual union goes against the biological meaning of marriage, the aim of which is procreation. That is why same-sex marriage is in a way a self-contradiction already, as such union is incapable of bearing children. According to Dr Patricia Morgan: “ It reinforces the idea that marriage is irrelevant to parenthood.” But same-sex couples want to have the same life as traditional families which implies an opportunity of having children. And this brings one of the most controversial aspects of the issue: children adoption. Should same-sex couples be allowed to be foster parents? Do they serve as good role models and which values do they teach their kids? But even if those parents can provide their adopted kids with normal life and decent upbringing, their children may still face many difficulties and go through serious psychological trauma as they have to go through peer judgment, misunderstanding, and prejudices. How do they feel when everyone else has their mother and father but their family is different. How do they perceive their families? How the others do? How does it all influence children’s psychological development? Even though they tend to say that there is no significant difference in upbringing in same-gender family as compared to traditional one, some studies, for instance the one, published in American Sociological Review from Apr. 2001 state that children with same-sex parents are more likely to be engaged in homosexual behavior, feel sexual uncertainty, have early sexual experience. It is also well known that children tend to perform better when they are raised by both biological parents, when they have both mother and father.
There is also a common concern that legal recognition of same-sex marriages can also serve as an impetus for accepting polygamy. People think that if society permits same-gender marriage, then it may cause more changes in traditional understanding of marriage. In a broader sense, same-sex marriage could lead down a slippery slop causing unpredicted consequences. Many opponents of the issue say that if we accept this as a norm now then what is going to be the next demand? Where is this path leading and where are the boundaries?
Public debate continues, involving legislators, media, and Church. Yet most emotional reactions and two loudest voices arguing on the issue come from gay community and religious community. Church is one of the main opponents of the issue and most arguments of the issue overall are based on biblical ground addressing the scripture which cannot be disconfirmed. Bible addresses homosexuality seeing it as unnatural, condemned and wrong, as a sin against God and human nature (Leviticus 18: 22, Deuteronomy 23: 17, Romans 1: 26). Biblical image of marriage as a holy union of man and woman is what we’re used to see as universal understanding of marriage. The most common religious argument against same-gender union revolves around scripture. Examples can be taken from Matthew 19: 4-6: “ Haven’t you read,” he replied, “ that at the beginning the Creator ‘ made them male and female,’and said, ‘ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” Or the most popular one from Leviticus 18: 22, which says: ” Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable”.
It is very controversial whether marriage should be viewed a religious or civic act. For many centuries, starting from the Middle Ages marriage was a prerogative of the Church which had complete control over it. Long lasting tradition created generally accepted roles for each spouse within relationship. With the increase of same-sex marriage tendency those traditional roles become blended and blurred. Homosexual couples are asking for the same legal status as other couples. But they go beyond that. Some churches now even offer to perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples. And the number of those religious denominations who conduct same-sex marriages is increasing. Does it mean that church is trying to modernize its assertions and go hand in hand with the social changes that take place in modern society? Or is it a signifier of a crisis, a complete reversal of values and principles which occurs even within religious institution? Yet most people who consider themselves to be convinced members of any religious denomination view same-sex marriage as a legal or official encroachment of Christian values.
Marriage is a cultural symbol, part of a cultural model typical for Western civilization. According to Spengler and Toynbee’s concepts of civilization, the decay of the institution of family which is an inseparable part of a culture is one of the catalysts of the decrease of civilization itself.
Americans are profoundly divided when it comes to the question about same-gender marriage. Supporters of the idea want a judicial declaration of their rights. Those, who are opposed to the idea want an amendment which prohibits from recognizing same-sex marriages. Disagreements seem to be never-ending and profound. It seems that more and more states tend to support the issue.
After the growth of gay rights movement in 1970s homosexuality got public attention and became something if not acceptable than at least tolerated and less stereotyped. Now it is constantly being advertised and promoted in mass media. The number of its advocates grows respectively. According to Nate Silver From1988 to 2010, public support for gay marriage increased at a rate of 1 to 1. 5 points per year. Netherlands was the first country to officially legalize same-sex marriage in 2001. By now, with recent decision of Rhode Island, same-gender marriage is legalized in 10 American states. Fifty years ago themes on homosexuality were prohibited in Hollywood movies, attitudes change, and nowadays media is one of the most effective tools of its propaganda.
Now opponents of same-sex marriage are being criticized, blamed to be full of unreasonable prejudice, stigmatized as bigots with narrow secular ideology only because they are trying to preserve traditional norms and values which they grew up on. But aren’t their rights being limited than as well?
Debate over the current topic has been one of the prominent issues of our society for past few decades. The question about legalizing same-sex marriages is very ambivalent. It brings a lot of arguments draws drastic emotions. I still believe that opposite-sex marriage is the only appropriate norm of marriage. Every child should have a right for a normal traditional family, should have a right for having a mommy and a daddy because the quality of their nurture and upbringing is directly tied to the quality of life within society. We have to promote the image of stable family, healthy environment for raising children, sufficiency of ethics; we have to preserve traditional moral norms and values. It is not about discrimination or intolerance, homosexuality exists and we have to accept this fact, but its legal recognition will mean its support and promotion.
As a society we have to seek to preserve and strengthen the institution of marriage. In this way we are strengthening our future and future of our children. That is why I am completely against same-sex marriage and its legalization.

Works Cited

Andryszewski, Tricia. Same-Sex Marriage: Moral Wrong or Civil Right?, 2007
Baker, Brittney. Same-Sex Marriage and Religion: An Inappropriate Relationship. A Journal of Undergraduate Work. Vol 1, No 3, 2010.
Chauncey, George.  Why Marriage?: The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality, 2004
Dupuis, Martin. Same-Sex Marriage: Legal Mobilization, and the Politics of Law. New York: Peter Lang, 2002.
Morgan, Patricia. Gay marriage will destabilise family life, sociologist warns. The Telegraph, Mar 2013
McKinney, Jack. A Christian Case For Same-Sex Marriage. In Baird and Rosenbaum, eds., Same-Sex Marriage: The Moral and Legal Debate. New York: Prometheus Books, 2004.
Silver, Nate. Opinion on Same-Sex Marriage Appears to Shift at Accelerated Pace. www. fivethirtyeightr . com, Aug. 12, 2010