The Flourishing Same-Sex Communities - Essay Example

With the flourishing same-sex communities in all parts of the world, especially in the developed nations, same-sex relationship issues have come to be discussed in all sorts of local, national and international forums. Those with homosexual preferences, whether gay or lesbian, are trying to gain recognition and acceptance. While an acceptance of the sexual preferences of this community by the heterosexual community at large has been slow in coming, a large number of countries now recognize the rights of homosexuals to education, employment and lifestyle at par with the rest of the society. In some countries like Netherlands, Denmark and so on, same-sex unions are now legally acceptable. Urgent debates have now arisen between the homosexual community supported by the pro-gay rights activists who argue for the rights of same-sex citizens to be married just the same as heterosexual marriages; and the religious, social, moral and political authorities who do not support same-sex marriages. The legalization of same-sex marriages is thus an issue of common and urgent concern, and all voices must be heard before making a legal judgment in this situation. In the present situation of homosexual promiscuity especially in the gay community, and the looming threat of AIDS, same sex marriage may just be the solution. It would promote monogamy, thus reigning in the danger of fatal diseases, as well as setting up an ideal for the community where two people publicly vow their life-long commitment to each other. This will also give both gay and lesbian communities a sense of being accepted. A large number of these individuals whether from gay or lesbian communities have made significant contributions to society and enforcing their right to marry would give them the freedom to live respectable lives as married couples in mainstream society. Furthermore, it would no longer be necessary for those with homosexual preferences to enter heterosexual marriages which end up in the divorce court or lead to a lifetime of frustrated conjugal life. Homosexual marriages would be just as socially acceptable, and would contribute to fewer break-ups in heterosexual relationships due to forced or involuntary participation. But same sex marriages may be too dramatic a departure from tradition for most people where dictionaries, encyclopedias and law books all define marriage necessarily as the union of a man and a woman. The very idea of two men in suits or two women in wedding gowns on the wedding aisle may form a disconcerting picture, which a civil ceremony can only marginally mitigate. Most people consider marriage between a man and a woman to be the crucial and the most basic building unit of society, and when this changes to marriages between the same sex, it becomes an unfamiliar, bewildering territory where the threat of complete social disintegration looms large. In common perception, one of the main reasons two people get married is also for procreation, for the provision of a nurturing environment for future progeny, which would form the next generation. Homosexual couples cannot have their own children, because nature ordained the mating of the male and the female to create a new life, and thus a fruitless union of the same sex may seem somewhat unnatural, and against the continued survival of our species. On the other hand, it may be argued that in our modern age there are various methods a same-sex married couple can use to have children, starting from adoption to artificial insemination, so this should not be an issue against same-sex marriages at all. If fertility were the basic condition for matrimony, a lot of older couples beyond the childbearing age or infertile people would have been denied the right to marry, and this is not so. More importantly, a same-sex marriage actually gives respectable status to the adopted child or artificially inseminated child, because it gives them a stable family life where both the caregivers are in a committed, caring relationship. Legalization of same-sex marriages may also be recommended on the grounds that this gives one partner the privileges of being the next-of-kin. By being the legal "spouse" the partner is able to inherit property or entitlements, receive dependent residential passes while shifting to different countries and make crucial decisions on the partner's behalf when the partner is unable to make that that decision in case of a medical emergency. This gives rise to a few concerns. If same-sex couples are given the legal right to marry with all the privileges a traditional married couple is able to enjoy, a lot of people could enter a same-sex marriage simply for profitable reasons like the right to inherit property and so on, and not because of mutual love. Same-sex marriages becoming legal may open the road for other relationships being legalized like polygamy or incest. Once a concession has been made for homosexual marriages and all the hitherto conventionally unacceptable practices like sodomy, the road will be open for people to demand the right to marry for any sort of relationship or any kind of people. They would cite same-sex marriages as a precedent and demand the right to marry anyone. The right to marry should not be lightly given, even today it is not universal in secular societies, someone already married may not enter into a marriage, for example. But supporters of same-sex marriages may argue that there is little evidence that legalized same-sex unions start a trend towards other undesirable consequences like bestial marriage or polygamous marriage. The countries where some form of legal homosexual unions do exist have not reported any demands for other forms of unnatural marriages. In the Scandinavian countries where gay or lesbian couples have been given rights to register publicly as a couple there have been no social degenerations into depraved marriages. On the other hand heterosexual marriages in all nations regularly take place with known felons, child abusers, rapists and other similar depraved individuals, and there is no law against marriage for such individuals. Same-sex marriages may find an argument in the fact that contrary to being the role model for depraved sexual activities, they actually form a strong nurturing background for children, as discussed earlier. In case of the death of one of the partners, unmarried same-sex partners are not in a position to take care of the children, unless having adopted them before, and in some places, such adoptions are themselves illegal. Same-sex marriages would thus be beneficial to children whether begot in earlier marriages by either partner, or adopted, or artificially inseminated. If same-sex marriage is made legal this will also entail that if the same-sex couple separates or gets divorced, child support matters can be sorted out in a way similar to heterosexual divorces, which is all good for the children. To conservatives and traditionals these material benefits may seem small in comparison to the perceived loss for children in terms of gender confusions. In their opinion, it is very possible that the children in same-sex households end up confused about sex and gender issues. It must be difficult to grow up in a home where you either have two daddies or two mommies, instead of the regular daddy and the mommy most of their friends and classmates tend to have. This may create a confusion in the minds of the children, and lead them to become homosexuals even if they were not naturally born so. They may feel a religious, cultural and social outcast. Religion, at least in most countries with very few exceptions, does not appreciate same-sex unions and this is held up as the biggest reason by most conservatives why same-sex marriages should not be legalized. Same-sex unions are seen as immoral in almost all religious texts except a few in the Buddhist faith, and legalizing same-sex marriages would be tantamount to going against the dictates of religion. In most secular countries, this perception of immorality would be seen as an invalid argument, because law in these countries is distinct from all the dictates of faith and religion. Legally, a secular country is perfectly within its rights to give recognition to same-sex marriages, and may not pay any heed to what any of the religions practiced in the nation have to say on the issue. While pro-gay and lesbian groups would continue to advocate the right of same-sex couples to marry on the grounds that it is actually a stabilizing occurrence for the homosexual community and society in general with a lot of benefits to children involved, those opposing gay marriages have arguments of their own. In a society which has traditionally seen heterosexual marriages, it would be difficult to put aside religious moral and social objections against it, not to forget concerns about child welfare. Same-sex marriage is a sensitive topic in each of the nations where it has become relevant, and legalization of such marriages in a particular nation would depend entirely on the will of its people. I have attached the table for easy reference to the arguments which are each organized in separate paragraphs as required. Guiding Question Should we legalize same sex marriages Introduction Discussion of who is arguing and why it is important that we discuss this issue Claim #1 in favor We should legalize same sex marriages because this will stabilize society. Rebuttal of Claim #1 Claim "A" in opposition Society will not be stabilized, its very basis will be shaken up....marriage is supposed to be between opposite sexes and cannot be between members of the same sex. We should not legalize same sex marriages because marriages are for procreation, and our survival as a species would be threatened, if people of same sex, unable to produce children had the right to marry. Rebuttal of Claim "A" Claim #2 in favor Same sex marriages do not threaten procreation, there are ways to artificially inseminate or adopt children. We should legalize same sex marriages because it gives the partner right to property /investment/entitlement/emigration/ as well as to be the next-of-kin during emergencies. Rebuttal of Claim #2 Claim "B" in opposition People may get involved in same-sex marriages just for the sake of property and not for love or commitment. We should not legalize same sex marriages because it leads down a slippery slope of more depraved marriages. Rebuttal of Claim "B" Claim #3 in favor There is little proof that shows same sex marriage will lead down a slippery slope like incest or polygamy. We should legalize same sex marriages because it provides a sound basis for the upbringing of the children adopted or from previous marriages, and sorts out issues of child support etc.. Rebuttal of Claim #3 Claim "C" in opposition The children in same-sex marriages are bound to be confused about gender issues. We should not legalize same sex marriages because it is against the teachings of religion and is immoral. Rebuttal of claim "C" Religion has no place regarding the laws, including marriage laws in all secular countries and is therefore not a factor in legalizing same sex marriages. Conclusion Unbiased summary of both sides of the issue Read More