The Dark Side of Gay Marriages - Research Paper Example

Revealing the dark side of regulating Gay Marriages Gay marriage is touted as the most controversial and debatable topic of the twenty-first century. From a small-town group talk and slow-paced movement of the previous times, suddenly the call for making same-sex marriage a constitutional right has become an issue of global importance. It has turned out to be the most socially divisive and ethically challengeable issue of the decade. The reason behind its controversial stature in society is that apart from upholding the right for freedom of choice and unconditional love, this issue paves the way for several alarming problems. It also questions various ethical, social, cultural, and in fact, physical or naturally-occurring norms. In the longer run, these problems and conceptual disagreement may pose great negative impacts on the generations to come. The cynical effects of allowing gay marriages are so diverse that it will not be appropriate to overlook them. This paper is an attempt to unveil those significant matters, conceptual deviations and complications that this issue entails. To derive a fair conclusion, the thesis will be evaluated on numerous notable aspects affiliated with homosexuality. Gay marriage is an unnatural union: Michael Levin, a renowned author and professor of psychology at City University of New York, stated that “Homosexual activists are partial to genetic explanations and hostile to Freudian environmentalism” (Levin 235). The point cannot be denied that the relationship shared by gays is unnatural and defies the laws of nature to procreate, which produces profound impact on their family and a question mark on socially accepted gender roles. Gay Marriage refers to the union of two homosexual males who are unsure about their sexual orientation and decide to receive social acceptance for their relationship through a legal agreement. The unsettlement or uncertainty of their sexual orientation is caused by numerous factors such as biological, but societal interferences and early-childhood experiences greatly influence a person's sexual preferences afterwards. Hence, it can be stated that not all homosexuals are born with this sort of inclination, and it is not always genetic. (Barlow and Durand 351) Furthermore, even if it is genetic, it is curable through modern therapeutic techniques. “Clinicians evidently agree that it is possible for a person to be homosexual at one period of his life and heterosexual at another," revealed Levin (235). What makes the homosexual urge unnatural is that procreation is the main task God created mankind for, and only that process can be termed as natural which functions the way it has been designed for (McDowell 1201). If homosexuality prevails, encouraged and promoted in society, then the very essence of life gets betrayed, and the world will be exempt of life in no time. Moreover, homosexuality cannot be included in the natural category since it upholds personal pleasure, and homosexuals can be referred to as people caring less about society and only about their satisfaction. Patrick Buchanan rightly proclaims that “the poor homosexuals- they have declared war upon nature, and now nature is exacting an awful retribution” (Wells 259). Moreover, unlike lesbians, gays cannot even utilize artificial methods for the sake of procreation. Ryan Normandin, editor of The Tech, researched about this aspect and concluded that “Same-sex couples are unable to procreate, meaning that there is no compelling interest to subsidize their marriages” (5). There is an important point for governments to understand in this statement. That is, when supporters of homosexuality propagate that attainment of “enhanced happiness” should be the central focus of allowing gay marriage; it gives rise to the debate on subsidizing everything that promotes happiness. It can be anything, from a simple item like chocolate to human-pet marriage, incest, abortion or even brother-sister marriage. Homosexuality is a psychological dilemma that only encourages unhappiness: A never-ending debate between psychologists is underway since 1980s on the rationality and saneness behind the urge for homosexuality. In America until 1970s, homosexual behavior was deemed abnormal and the person was declared psychologically disturbed (Passer 532). However, after the increasing sense of toleration among public towards gays, strong protests from activists and political pressures, APA removed it from the list of DSM diseases of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on December 15, 1973 (Passer 532). Nonetheless, it is still not concluded whether it can be termed as normal or abnormal behavior. Levin declared homosexuality as an abnormal behavior, because it entails the misuse of body parts, which propels unhappiness (233). If the research of Levin is to be believed, then it becomes clear that the process itself negates the very spirit of homosexuality, which is of attaining enhanced happiness. Indian psychiatrist Dr Manish Jain says that "Among homosexuals, quite a few have deviated sexual behavior, which is also known as Paraphilia in medical parlance. In such conditions, the affected person develops co-morbidity with narcistic personality disorder or love with same sex rejecting the opposite sex." He further asserts that it is curable through Reorientation Therapy. (Jain) Another point raised from gay-marriage activists to counter the issue of procreation is through adopting a child, which is touted as an important positive feature associated with this act. It is rather understandable, but if the research from Stanford's psychologist Eleanor MacCoby is taken into account, then it becomes clear that a child needs both the parents to receive a perfectly normal physical and mental growth. MacCoby confirms that "mothers, on average, may have somewhat stronger parental ‘instincts’ when it comes to responding to young infants.” It is indeed more advantageous for children to grow up having both a mother and a father" (Normandin 5). Medical and health-oriented implications of homosexuality: In continuation of the unnatural aspect of this urge, the point that further establishes the negative attributes of gay marriage is related to its impact on a male’s health. The compulsive nature of homosexuals, and the kind of activities involved in this act are strong perpetrators of significant health risks. Earle Fox and David Virtue revealed that “although homosexuals represent only 1-3% of the population, they are responsible for half of the nation’s syphilis cases” (237). They further declare that homosexuals are slightly more vulnerable to intestinal infections and gonorrhea of the throat than heterosexuals. Roger Magnuson gave a detailed account on homosexuality-related diseases in his work “Are Gays Rights Right?" In this book, he informed that the rate of infectious Hepatitis B is 20 to 50 times higher in homosexuals, and also they are prone to Hepatitis A more than heterosexuals (Magnuson 43). Homosexual men have a greater tendency of catching chronic or recurrent viral infection, which was proven in San Francisco soon after the gay right laws in America were implemented. The national average of venereal diseases was increased 22 times, Hepatitis A average increased to 100%, Hepatitis B infection increased to 300%, and amoebic colon infections average increased to 25,00% (Magnuson 43). During the first decade, clinicians treated around 75,000 patients of venereal diseases annually and reportedly, 80% were homosexuals who also carried rectal gonorrhea (Magnuson 44). Moreover, Gay Bowels Syndrome is also a significant disease homosexuals become potential carriers of since many of them ingest fecal matter, and also they can catch Parasitic Amebiasis, which is an infection of the colon seldom found in heterosexuals. All this cannot be a coincidence by any means, and apparently homosexuals definitely are highly prone to infectious and genital diseases. Gay Marriage defies the spirit of marriage: Gay marriage is a demand that starkly contradicts every religion’s divine laws regarding marriage, and also violates the social regulations that determine a marital relation’s eligibility. It is an undeniable fact that God’s law is much more influential and preferable than any other law and same goes for the sacred institution called marriage. However, in the current social scenario, it has become a two-fold agreement; that is, it requires both communal regulation and ethical approval. Any marital relation that interrupts divine laws is not accepted in society as well. Therefore, if gay marriage violates the very essence and spirit of marriage, then it definitely must be counted as a morality based issue as well as an indication of social retaliation. To understand the reason due to which gay marriage is supposed to be violating the divine laws, it is important to analyze its definition. Gallagher and Corvino propagate that marriage in its true spirit can be described as “a sexual union of husband and wife” (96). They further assert that marital relation has the power to unite two people for the sake of pro-creation, which if achieved differently is deemed an inappropriate act. There is no concept of a marriage otherwise, which makes the demand for a licensed gay marriage right null and void. United States, being a globally renowned super-power, also exercises this pattern and defined marriage in its Defense of Marriage Act 1966 as a union of man and a woman under federal law. (Soifer 147) Therefore, it can be said that gay marriage is in sharp contrast to the spirit of marriage since it does not fulfill its main criteria. If it was an acceptable relation, then the current US Military Policy would not have prohibited homosexuals from entering the armed forces. (Soifer 147) There is significant reasoning behind the concept that marriage roots from, one of which is the fact that females outnumber males by a considerably large proportion throughout the world. For example, in America, there are 7.8 million, Britain is inhabited by around 4 million, Germany accommodates 5 million and Russia is housed by 9 million more females (Al-Kindy 77). The supporters of gay marriage might argue that there are also countries where males are in larger numbers like India. However, the truth is that in Indian society, the ratio of males is greater because of the practicing of criminal acts like Female Foeticide and Infanticide. In such a scenario, if gay marriage is promoted, then a large section of females will be deprived of a normal physical/sexual life and the prospect of a proper family for them will diminish with time. An important point in this regard, which stems from both the ethical and scientific modules, is that women and man have been created for one another. Wills Bruce explained that “women surpass men in personal beauty; and for this, there is a use as well as a cause. Love comes from the woman to the man, from the maiden o the youth, not contrariwise” (34). This is an important point in the support of heterosexual orientation, and in fact, the very basic reason behind the different outlook of the bodies of males and females. Levin is also of the opinion that in the human body, every organ has its own natural function, which neither can be altered nor restrained (232). His theory makes sense if combined with the research of Wills, and this can be accumulated that male and female have been destined to be together, and same-sex attraction is actually impossible in normal circumstances. Gay marriage cannot advocate civil rights: Based on the mandatory constitutional right for freedom of marriage such as USA’s Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, gays try to justify their point and propagate it as a movement for gaining equality, freedom to love and civil rights. (Nomandin 5) Any disagreement in this regard is being received as an attempt to promote discrimination in society. Nonetheless, that fact is that this movement is not similar to the civil rights movement by the African-American community in the latter half of 20th century, nor is it at par with the anti-slavery struggle of the 19th century. It is true that in many countries, including USA, marriage is a matter of state not federal government. In other words, it is a civil matter and not a religious affair anymore since even atheists possess the right of marriage in a contemporary society. However, believing gay marriage as a concept in line with the movement against racism and inequality to attain constitutional rights and benefits affiliated with marriage is an inappropriate notion. That is because sexual orientation and preferences are a completely different phenomenon in comparison to racism or slavery. Moreover, states encourage marriage to ensure the positive and healthy upbringing of the next generation. It is already discussed above that a child needs mutual affection from mother and father to develop properly, which cannot happen in same-sex marriage. The basic point is that laws can regulate the prohibition of inequality, approve marriages regardless of ethnic, economic, and religious differences, but how can it favor an unnatural and impossible union. James Skillen writes, “a homosexual relationship does not and cannot include sexual intercourse leading to pregnancy. Thus, it is not marriage” (Skillen). Civil law only determines the way of conduct according to the rules set by the government, and from this perspective, everyone enjoys civil rights even those who are in a live-in relationship. However, to protest for something that does not fall into the supposed category is inappropriate and unworthy of attention. It can encourage various other socially and legally prohibited practices: It is a fact that the debate in support of gay marriage is being observed at a time when another one on allowing abortion at any trimester of pregnancy is also underway. Both the issues are deemed as of similar nature. In an article from The Economist, it was reported that: “The debate over same-sex marriage resembles the debate over abortion. Both involve thorny, intersecting questions of religious freedom, personal liberty and sex” (Orlando). Approval of homosexuality and gay marriage will initiate a movement in favor of non-monogamous relations on grounds that if interracial and same-sex marriage is alright, then why the state cannot allow incest, polygamy, and other socially disliked practices. (Lee 67) The point cannot be overlooked that given the overwhelming ratio of females in society, polygamy may turn out to be a feasible option. Abortion can also be considered as the promoter of enhanced happiness, a notion from which the movement for gay marriage stemmed from, from the perspective of those who do not want a child. Moreover, why is abortion so strongly condemned when it does not violate anyone’s civil right, especially not of an unborn child? The famous Roe vs Wade's decision from US Supreme Court in 1973 is an important example in this regard, which changed the state’s perception on abortion (Lee 68). Another such case may require government to allow polygamy and marriage between brother and sister or adult and minor, etc. Then the supporters of abortion may also want the government to subsidize the procedure (Lee 68). The issues will be never ending, and the fact remains that consequences of allowing gay marriage will be devastating. If rules and norms of society are determined on the basis of personal preferences and not on the divine or social guidelines, then every single act should be allowed irrespective of its nature and outcome. Conclusion: After judging from various aspects involved, it can be claimed that supporting gay marriage is like paving the way for acceptance of many other physically and socially exploitive acts, which is certainly not in favor of society and the world from a broader spectrum. It can be said that homosexuality is a completely unnatural urge and definitely needs to be curbed or at least restricted. The point to be noted is that there is no need to allow something that neither nature permits nor does it possess the potential to make society a better place. It will, however, eventually worsen the situation, because when legalizing free-sex can increase rape rates, similarly same-sex marriage will pave the way for further enrichments in marital contract rules. For the sake of promoting a principled, naturally harmonious and disciplined lifestyle, it is important to restrict the prevalence and frequency of homosexual relations. So that it does not impose adverse effects on the norms of the world, and encourage acceptance of various other inappropriate issues as an outcome. Works Cited Al-Kindy, Farahat. The Comprehensive Guide For Da'wah In Mosques. Bassam Bokhowa, 2005. 77. Print. Barlow, David, and Vincent M. Durand. Abnormal Psychology: An Integrative Approach. 6th. Cengage Learning, 2011. 351. Print. Bruce, Williams. Marriage A Divine Institution And A Spiritual And Enduring Union. Kessinger Publishing, 2004. 34-35. Print. Corvino, John, and Maggie Gallagher. Debating Same-Sex Marriage. Oxford University Press, 2012. 95-97. Print. Fox, F. Earle, and David Virtue. Homosexuality: Good and Right in the Eyes of God. 2nd. Emmaus Ministries, 2002. 237-238. Print. Jain, Manish. "Homosexuality can be cured: Psychiatrists." Times of India. N.p., 28 Mar 2012. Web. 20 Apr 2013. . Lee, Karen. Equality, Dignity, and Same-sex Marriage: A Rights Disagreement in Democratic Societies. BRILL, 2010. 67-69. Print. Levin, Michael. "Why Homosexuality is Abnormal." Monist. 67.2 (1984): 230-239. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. . Magnuson, Roger. Are gay rights right?: making sense of the controversy. Multnomah, 1990. 41-44. Print. McDowell, Shane. Apologetics Study Bible for Students. B&H Publishing Group, 2010. 1201. Print. Normandin, Ryan. "Gay marriage should not be made legal." The Tech 06 July 2011, 29 5-6. Web. . Orlando, J.F. "A hard Roe to hoe." Economist 22 March 2013, n. pag. Web. . Passer, Michael. Psychology 3E. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 2006. 532. Print. Skillen, James W. "Same-Sex "Marriage" Is Not a Civil Right." The Center for Public Justice. N.p., July 2004. Web. 20 Apr 2013. . Soifer, Paul. CliffsNotes AP U.S. Government and Politics. 2. Wiley, 2010. 147-148. Print. Read More