Philosophy - Gay Marriages - Admission/Application Essay Example

? Gay Marriages A few of us argue that marriage is labeled intently as a relationship that exists between a man and a woman. Therefore, gays cannot marry. The term gay here means people of same sex getting into romantic relationships. In reality, the factor of marriage has altered in description and composition a lot of times over the past years. Marriage ceremony these days isn’t at all like what it was a few years ago or centuries ago. The notion of gay marriages is still not widely accepted for the fact that gay pairs are considered as not being normal or natural for that matter. This is the reason why people have such diverse opinions regarding this matter specifically and about homosexuality in general broader terms. For most of the individuals, heterosexual affairs are the custom, both in the world and in natural history. Homosexual relations are hence nonstandard and aberrant; consequently, they are not supposed to be authorized by the circumstances nor acknowledged as a type of matrimony.(Cline, 2011) Gay marriage advocates shield their arrangement with the point that the government is being biased towards a gay relationship by allowing only opposite-sex marriages as legal. Likewise, social tolerance advocates that the government has no right to interfere in the personal consensual sex of adults of the same sex if nobody is getting hurt in the relationship. If truth be told, the government may cling to the aspect that this kind of behavior is ethically wrong and society is bound to put a damper on things, but it is also true that the state has to tolerate it for the fact that it can be senselessness and can lead to criminalizing the behavior and this is why the state chooses to put up with it. The proponent of social tolerance need not accept personal subjective relativism and personal autonomy as fundamental to his or her political and social philosophy. Discussion over gay marriage constitutes both lawful and community point of view, both in favor and against the topic. Lawful wiles on behalf of gay marriage have a propensity to get more awareness for the reason that it should be an issue of essential civil and equivalent rights. Considering if gay marriage were hurtful, the sameness and self-esteem of gay pairs ought to be esteemed, despite the fact that it’s not factual or no less than self-evident, that gay marriage would be unsafe. Quite the reverse, there are indications that legally recognized gay marriage would advantage all of us. Old-fashioned individuals who frequently are in opposition to gay marriage squabble are of the view that properly established families are a foundation stone to an unwavering civilization. Family units are the smallest social unit in the social order and the manner of families collectively has a direct influence on trends in the social order as a group and vice-versa. Permitting gay couples to walk down the aisle will assist healthier incorporation and their relations into the social order. Making definite that gay marriages are secure and supporting them will do good to the solidity of the world taken as a whole. People who do not like the concept of gay marriage disagree that it would chip away the tradition of wedding. If something troubles marriage, it is appalling weddings where inhabitants don’t take wedding sincerely and that’s by now too frequent with heterosexuals. On the other hand, if gay couples in dedicated relations are capable to make official their unification as wedding that would be able to provide a positive image of marriage on the whole by providing more encouraging benchmarks. Many campaigners have sought to fight for the official confirmation of gay marriage through the magistrates and to make its legalization official. Despite, there not being many reasons to not cater to the legalization of gay marriages in the legal framework of a society, this remains an issue that is highly sensitive and controversial for many people, the reason being that it is an issue that questions the very ethical, moral and religious roots of a society. This dispute is in all probability the only one which adversary of gay marriages can pragmatically look forward to use if they want to make an officially permitted and ethical case. They exploit the negative implications that they think might arise due to the legalization of this whole affair. On the other hand, if rationally analyzed, not allowing for people to follow their free will is more probable of leading to more hurt in society, while allowing the legalization of such affair might be more beneficial than the negative aspects and same is the case with gay marriages. Based on all the above arguments, it can be said that gay marriages should be made official for many reasons. Majorly because everybody has the right to live their life the way they want. And as long as love is unconditional and nobody is getting hurt, there is no point in stopping someone from getting married; be it a gay couple that wants to get married. Likewise, marriage is not always about reproduction; if that is the case then even infertile people should be banned from getting married. Likewise, denying their rights is also wrong; for instance, when a gay couple decides to adopt a child, it is usually observed that the couples are asked to wait on purpose, just because of the fact that they are gays. It should be made clear to everyone that gay families can be as respectable as the families of a heterosexual couple. And the state should ask orphanages to increase the number of adaptation for gay couples since they cannot reproduce. The first reason why same sex marriage ought to be lawful is because it is nondiscriminatory for all individuals to have equal rights in the social order. But whatsoever gives this scenario a serious thought comes to final conclusion that gay Americans are not lawbreakers in any way. The second opposition on why same-sex marriage is duty-bound to be legal is for the reason that a same-sex couple can actually establish a noble household, which has also been validated by American Academy of Pediatrics that has documented that gay families can be just as affectionate and reassuring to an atmosphere for nurturing an offspring as the straight type. Adversaries think that a same sex couple household is not a virtuous domain for raising an offspring and they are also of the view that it might further give rise to more gays in the society. However, it is not reason enough to justify the fact that a human does not have any control over the sexual or love choices s/he makes. Likewise, there exist a lot of misconceptions about gay relations, and even a pronounced deal of confusion about what wedding itself is all about. But then again, the significant element to keep in mind is that just as in straight culture, where such relations also are present, they are an insignificant minority, and be existent primarily among the very young age group. The standards that gay couples show in their lives often lack clarity from those of their straight neighbors. They are trustworthy to their partners, are committed, dedicated spouses. They worth and play a part in family natural life, are dyed-in-the-wool to making their vicinities and societies innocuous and better residences to breathe in, and honor and put up with the law and the regulations. However, it is usually observed specifically in the old times, due to peer pressure from the family and the society, gays would marry a girl of their parent’s choice but they continue to have a scene behind their wives back. To counter such issues, it is of great benefit that gay marriages are made official and legal so that less lives are destroyed and lesser heart breaks be witnessed. Acceptance is ostensibly no longer a Christian code rendering to the old-fashioned right. Agreeing to same sex marriages also unlocks the entrance to same sex twosomes being able to take on children and this would be a mode for homosexuals to employee innocent children into the positions of militant homosexuals. This custody calls into question the datum that homosexuality just like heterosexuality is a born trait, not an educated trait. However, it is true that a true Christian or any other religion do not have space for gay children or adults, but just like we value the rights of in-betweens or she-males, we should value the rights of same-sex married couples because it is their lives and they have every right to live in their own way unless they are breaking the laws that would harm the society or anybody else and most importantly everybody would be answerable to their actions on the Day of Judgment. In maximum religions counting, Christianity, Islam, and Orthodox Judaism same-sex fondness is immorality. People accept as true in procreation to repopulate the world, but are against gay marriage and homosexuals adopting children because they cannot procreate on their own. If this is a stand point on making or breaking gay marriage, then only people who are fertile and want to procreate should be able to get married. America has never really given gay marriage a chance as they believe gay marriage will weaken its institution by leading to high divorce rates. On loveandpride.com I read, “One reason legislatures are denying gay marriage is because they are fearful that opening the door to allowing gay marriages will open the door to polygamy as well. This would also mean reopening cases about polygamy in the past which they are not willing to do.” Others are fearful for children’s futures and they fear being raised by two fathers or by two mothers may compromise children’s mental capacities. True that the mental capacities of children will be compromised because they are being raised up by a gay or a lesbian couple but on the other hand to counter such issues gay marriages should be made legal so that children would not have to face the wrath of the society and other children of the same age. (Should Same Sex Marriages Be Legalized, 2011) On the other hand, the social order is heartrending in the direction of a more culturally cooperative and non-discriminating milieu where people are tolerable to hold innumerable philosophies, no matter what religious conviction or art, music, and literature they come from. The human rights defending laws are still in position for understandable whys and wherefores, but people should not be asked to keep an eye on the entire fine pattern of our leading religion. As soon as people finally agree to take the fact that homosexuals are existent, they are individuals, and they do have civil liberties, then equal opportunity would be able to transpire. Why do we have to twig to the era’s old, consistently base notion of wedding? We, by this time, see split-ups in about 50% of all weddings in North America as it is, so the "only with death do us part" undertaking is already passed over. If they are seen as customary, then they will be treated as equivalents. There are methods to see what our forthcoming may be like if we sanction same sex weddings. Does it mean that corrupt people lack morals too? It should not, even if it did, then things for instance having a prosthetic extremity, driving a hydrogen power-driven car, or a feminine CEO would have to be well-thought-out corrupt, for these things are not usual. To come to the conclusion that the Bible has no behavior on our principles is lack of knowledge. This does not make them corrupt, basically a beginner. Promoting the culture of gay marriages is also a fault of media. Media nowadays does not censor such issues rather it promotes this hot topic by making movies & ads on it. The American nation has grown habituated to the civil liberties of life, freedom and tracking down of contentment; on the other hand, there have always been underground groups circumscribed from these rudimentary human rights. Americans being so dominant on this world, if they start promoting the gay rights I am sure most of the world would be supportive of the issue too. Not because they want to, but because American culture is so influential that it is bound to happen one way or the other. Decriminalizing gay marriage in America is imperative for the reason that it is as plentiful a part of discernment as slavery was. The only metamorphosis in this scuffle is that religious conviction has become involved as a key disagreement argument. Many sacred people reason that the marriage is a holy thing between a gentleman and a lady. Conferring to Divorceform.org, 74% of the inhabitants break up each year and that figure is only from the population of straight married men and women. Voluminous people also debate that the inhabitants can't breed if we have menfolk wedding menfolk and womenfolk marrying womenfolk. Marriage is not something that must be flanked by a man and a woman in order to create children for the reason that many pairs decide on not to have families. Should even these individuals have wedding not allowed to them as well? (Gay Marriage Speech, 2011) I intensely believe that they gay marriages should be made legal and official union be allowed. A change like this would promote superior equivalence in many characteristics of life for homosexuals, and would also do away with the undesirable dishonor that comes into view everywhere for same sex couples. Outlawing same sex marriages is discernment, and in a biosphere that is go-getting for equal opportunity it is an enormous step towards narrow-mindedness. Homosexuals should be certified to espouse the person whom they sweetheart, just like heterosexuals. The crucial reason why these undesirable principles in the direction of homosexuality are so protruding in our ethos is because of the inordinate guidance of the Bible. Certain may say that the Bible has no end product on the lives of those who do not vigorously chip in in Judaism or Christianity, but they are off beam. Greatest of our laws these days still have odds and ends of the Ten Commandments in them. Assassination, robbery, and infidelity have detailed directives reproving their practice. Despite the fact, most people gay marriage should be prohibited and should stay in its current state, i.e., they are not allowed to marry each other openly, I am certain of that we require bringing a change in the world for forthcoming generations. We dreaded that dissimilar creeds were going to crash, but at the moment all of the religions live together. White individuals had Black and Hispanic slaves, but we overpowered the balances and currently White men, Black men, and Hispanic men can be equivalents and slaves are to be found in every ethnicity. If it is imaginable to overcome such aggressive stumbling block then we can overcome the state line hampering gay marriages and straight marriages the same. Gay marriage ought to be allowed for these particular reasons. Development will continuously come to an end and at any assumed point in time, something will befall that we might dislike in this world, but we can get over this as the time passes as they say, time heals all. Gay marriage is a provocative subject that people have been aggressive about for years and it has, as a final point, come to the exterior. It gives the impression that this is solely an unmitigated disagreement, which sounds worthy but means nonentity, since there are always people who are against or for it. The concern here is that it is people who need to change their attitudes, not homosexuals. Wedding does not inevitably have to be associated with proliferation. There is no motive why we as the social order should not award homosexuals the same privileges as homosexuals. We should give them the security so that they do not have to worry that people are going to beat them up late at night, their families won’t be stressed, and they will be capable to get married and have the identical civil liberties as heterosexual married duos. Homosexuals do not choose their private sexuality, nor do heterosexuals. For that reason, homosexual civic should be given the same high opinion and public constitutional rights as the heterosexual communal, one of these civil liberties being wedding. For starters, government does not have any right to look after who is marrying whom but if a government wants to ban the same-sex marriages; it is therefore their duty to put a stop on media that is promoting gay culture so rapidly. Works Cited Beckwith, F. J., Wedding Bell Blues: Understanding the Same-Sex Marriage Debate. Christian Research Institute. n.d., reviewed on December 3, 2011. [Available at], http://www.equip.org/articles/the-same-sex-marriage-debate Cline, A. Gay Marriage Will Undermine the Institution of Marriage. Atheism. 2011. reviewed on December 3, 2011. [Available at] http://atheism.about.com/od/gaymarriage/a/underminine.htm Gay Marriage Speech, OpPapers. 2011. reviewed on December 6, 2011. [Available at] http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Gay-Marriage-Speech/71998 Should Same Sex Marriages Be Legalized. 2011. reviewed on December 6, 2011. [Available at] http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/10269.html Read More