The Issue of Sanctioning Gay Marriages - Essay Example

Eng 226 Essay #2 Winter, 2008 Argumentative Topic: Gay Marriages The issue of sanctioning gay marriages has raised a lot of controversy in the recentdecades. A good part of the objection arises from religious groups and the conformist sects of the so-called civil society. However, an objective evaluation of the commonly held misconceptions regarding gay relationships is apt to reveal the antagonistic attitudes towards gay marriages. There had been mixed reactions to this topic from the rationalist and religious intellectuals, both favoring and contesting the validity of gay marriages. Apparently, it is time one has to gain a basic awareness regarding the human rights aspects of gay relationship and marriages, failing to which may lead to dire consequences with regard to the violation of human/minority rights. Scott Bidstrup’s essay “Gay Marriage: the Arguments and Motives” is a comprehensive analysis of the issue, with a balanced exegesis of viewpoints against gay marriages and well thought out and substantiated defenses against them. Referring to the hypocrisy existing among those who openly support gay relationships but fail to accept gay marriages, Bidstrup explores the core of the matter to find out the real reasons behind the general discontent towards gay marriages. He reveals that all the arguments against gay marriages are baseless if one scrutinizes them under the light of objective analyses. Instead of weakening the institution of marriage and jeopardizing social structures, gay marriages can have a positive effect on the personal and societal levels. One has to see it as a serious civil rights issue, and dissuade the prejudices propagated by political conservatism. Gay marriages are to be considered an essential human rights issue. It could raise the social statues and economic stability of the sexual minority of gays and lesbians. The civil rights aspect of it stems from the question of equality for all individuals. Homosexuals have to be treated on an equal basis in the socio-cultural sphere, and be provided equal opportunities to participate in all possible areas of public domain. The narrow-minded arguments against it by religious sects and homophobes have to be addressed and disproved so as to defend the basic rights of homosexuals. One may need to redefine the parameters of family structure to accommodate gay marriages, but that will only strengthen the possibilities of tackling the issues of dissent in the general social structure. A few of the controversial issues related to gay marriages have to be addressed and analyzed to make this view clear. According to Bidstrup, the real reasons behind the arguments against gay marriages go deeper to the levels of ignorance and lack of proper understanding among human beings. Many are misinformed regarding the nature of gay relationships and consider it as something entirely different from heterosexual relationships. Bidstrup reiterates the fact that the values that gay couples have “are often indistinguishable from those of their straight neighbors”. Gay relationships are often perceived to be all about sex, but that is hardly the issue. “The reality is that homosexuality is multidimensional, and is much more about love and affection than it is about sex” (Bidstrup). It is based on mutual attraction, love and affection, very much like in the case of heterosexuality. If the commonly held misconceptions regarding gay relationships can be eradicated, the prospect of gay marriages can be understood clearly. The false presumption that a marriage can take place only between a man and woman has to be uprooted. Nor does one have to fall for the argument that the basic purpose of marriage is procreation. The element of immorality attached to gay relationships is also baseless. All these and many more prejudices are the outcome of a myopic and reductive visions and conclusions. The religious views on gay marriages are the most vehement among the Christian sects where the churches land up in a delicate situation of having to give religious consent to such marriages. However, the instances from the Bible that deals with the issue of homosexuality are proven to be manipulated and misinterpreted so as to fit the power structure of the church. Moreover, one has the freedom to choose one’s religion. In Bidstrup’s view, this could also imply one’s freedom ‘from’ religion. In an age when the question of having of gay bishops fills newspaper columns, gay marriages are in no way to be considered a taboo topic. There are many religious sects that are accommodative of gay marriages, like the Western Buddhists. Even inside Christianity, there are divided opinions regarding gay marriages, and many churches have already sanctioned them. Those who use religion as an excuse to discriminate sexual minorities are in fact promoting an unequal socio-economic order where the heterosexuals could dominate. The view that homosexuality is unnatural sexual behavior is baseless. The major argument raised by those who propagated this view was that homosexuality was against the order of nature. The examples they drew from animal behavior is now proven wrong. Recent research shows that there is widespread practice of same sex relationships among animals. There are instances of same sex couples that deny a heterosexual partner even in times of heat. They could even raise orphans and act as parents in a successful manner. Bidstrup observes that this “means that it clearly has evolutionary significance, which applies as much to humans as it does to other animal species”. The view that a marriage can be sanctioned only on the assumption that the couple procreate can also be contested since there is no restriction regarding the marriage between heterosexual couples who are unable to procreate. The moral issues regarding raising children are also contrived. Many assume that homosexual couples are unable to raise children properly but fail to see that there are many among the heterosexual couples who are unfit to be parents. Moreover, the unnecessary fear about the negative impact of homosexual parents arises from baseless prejudices. The prejudices that exist in modern times regarding gay marriages are the result of ignorance regarding the issue. Those who argue against gay marriages are often repressed and unable to see the larger picture. The religious reservations on gay marriages betray the social structure in which religions survive. They try to propagate the specific religious power structure that promotes socio-economic superstructure that forms their existence. Homophobes spread baseless prejudices regarding homosexuality so as to defend their own repressed sexual status. Proper research and analyses are apt to legitimize gay marriages as a choice for those who need to sanction their long-term homosexual relationships. References Bidstrup, Scott. “Gay Marriage: the Arguments and Motives” http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm, March 4, 2008. http://grove.ufl.edu/~ggsa/gaymarriage.html, March 4, 2008. Read More