Movements fighting for gay marriages Essay

The gay marriage debate has been persistent all over the world. It is a divisive political issue that brings out a lot of conflict. In USA for instance, movements fighting for gay marriages and their rights started as early as 1970’s. In the 1990’s it was a great political issue. The US federal government has not legalized gay marriages although some states like Massachusetts allow civil unions. Gay couples in US do not share same rights as straight couples since their marriages are not considered legitimate. Without marriage laws to protect their rights and benefits such couples face turmoil’s in their relationships. For instance automatic inheritance with death of a partner and making important decision for instance signing for emergency medical operations is not allowed. USA should follow Denmark, Netherlands and Canada and legalize gay marriages as a step forward to reducing hate crimes in society and thus promoting social order. Again, since most people who oppose it desires it do so on the basis of religious values the secular values and desires of the people are not considered. It should draw the line between the state and the church so that it accommodates all people in the society. Legalizing gay marriages will see the decline of HIV-AIDS transmission, as gay couples will increase their sense of responsibility for each other. Gay couples should not be denied significant rights like access to partners insurance or medical decision making, workers and compensation benefits. Benefits under annuity and retirement plans all which are important (http://marriageequity. com/facts/index. htm) By not legalizing gay marriage the law discriminates on the basis of sex since one’s ability to marriage depends on one’s sex. Cuba has recently started to involve and respect gay couples by redefining marriage to accommodate all people in society, as socialism should be all inclusive. (http://asp. usatoday. com/community/utils/idmap/13917955. story) Discrimination against gay couples will be abolished and their unions or marriages will be legalized It is ironic that US the world’s leading countries in democracy restricts gay marriages while it should be advocating and fighting for equality of all marriages. Gay marriages should be legalized and couples should be entitled to social security benefits and protection under federal pension laws. This would reduce instances where on death of a partner one cannot access the partner’s benefits. In case the family had children such benefits would be of great importance in maintaining the children’s welfare. Without legal protection gay couples face economic hardships that would have been eradicated had their marriage been legalized. South Africa and Belgium have also embraced it and marriages between same sex couples receive blessings. Today, most children are born out of wedlock to single parents; marriages end divorce and the family as a unit that provides the appropriate atmosphere for children to grow is loosing the grip. Children are still being brought up successfully outside the conceived perfect environment of the ‘family’. Gay marriages should be legalized so as allow partners make important decisions like medical based decisions. It will allow one make important decision that would save the partners life. Arguments in support of gay marriages The government’s purpose is to ensure that people’s rights are respected and that equality is maintained. It is therefore fair that gay marriages be legalized. If gay marriages are recognized gay couples would take the advantage of automatic inheritance in case of death of one partner. Without such gay couples inherit nothing of what they have worked hard for with their partner. Both straight and gay couples should have equal rights. (http://angelfire. com/home /leah/index. html) It is argued that gay relationships are not biologically natural as they cannot produce children of their own naturally. Culturally marriage is the institution that forms and upholds societal and social values and norms. Marriages ensure the continuity of society through procreation. It is therefore argued that society would suffer if gay marriages were to be legalized, as the continuam would be interrupted. Gay marriages should be legalized and efforts by the church t use religious values and imposing them on all people in society are uncalled for. There should be a clear distinction between the church and the state so that the state operates independently to accommodate all its citizens including the secular minded. (Snyder, 2006) Legalizing gay marriages will help create order and stability in society. When legalized the ‘main society’ will change their rigid perception that gay marriage is illegal and they will fit well with them. This will reduce gay-based hate crimes. The whole society will have social unity and discrimination against gay people will reduce. Unions to guide gay couple on how to raise their children can only be effective if gay marriages were legalized. This would counter the argument that gay couples are not good in bring up children. The unions can help create good parenthood through training. Arguments against gay marriages It is argued that legalizing gay marriages will be a step towards welcoming anti-social behaviour. Just as gay couple seek for attention and protection of their rights so would other absurd groups. Moral decadency is likely to occur in society. It would pave way for polygamy, incest and beastiality legalization all of which are not good for society. Traditionally marriage is between a man and a woman and not same sex parties. Gay marriages are therefore against the traditional perception of marriage and should be discouraged. Naturally marriage should be between two people of different sexes. Attraction between two people of same sex is considered unnatural gay marriages should therefore come to a halt. Marriage should be an institution between a man and a woman. And those gay marriages are immoral. God created a woman for the man and not a man for a man or woman for another. Gay couples choose to be gay and should not seek attention for the choices they have made in life. (Hohengarten, 1994) Parents pose as role models to their children. Gay parents are likely to bring up gay children and this will not be good for society. Supporters of this viewpoint argue that children need heterosexual parents to develop. This would be lacking in the gay families and consequently poor child development. The above reasons face much criticism. For instance linking procreation strongly with marriage undermines the other purposes of marriage. Procreation is not the only reason why people marry. Those who support gay marriages consider this point of view incompetent on the basis that there are sterile or barren couples or women at their post menopausal age who marry. The question posed is whether such marriages ought to be considered null since they won’t bear children. Again marriage could be for sexual satisfaction companionship and moral expression. (Strasser, 2002) Another problem with the argument that gay marriage is immoral is that who defines marriage and what is moral or immoral calls for another debate altogether. People have different perception about what is moral or immoral. Using religious values to support eradication of gay marriages by quoting the bible is inappropriate especially to a country that accommodates diverse religions. This is an insufficient approach as freedom of religion will be compromised. Why install your religious aspects to life on people who are for a secular approach to life? (http://atheism. about. com/6/9/007160. html) The argument that children need heterosexual parents to grow and develop is quite shallow. There are cases where their development is jeopardized despite them having heterosexual parents. Children need good nurturing, tender care and love from their parent’s to develop. Again gay parents are more likely to bring up straight children to spare them the pain of discrimination they have through. (Ross, 2002) Some gay people are not gay by choice but by birth. Argument that gay couples are naturally attracted to same sex partners outdoes the argument that gay marriages are unnatural. Nature should take its course and they should be allowed to marry those they are attracted to regardless of their sex. (Pierson et al, 2005) Arguments raised against legalizing gay marriages on the basis of their instability are uncalled for since the straight marriages have proved to be 7% more instable compared to gay marriages. In the USA only two states legalize gay marriages that are Massachusetts and Lowa though they call them civil unions. The federal government under the defense of Marriage Act of 1996 leaves the states to decide on which approach to handle its issues. Gay couples want their marriages to be legalized. This will eradicate the discrimination they face, as society is not comfortable with them and view them as ‘outcast’ with legalization gay couples can gain recognition. (Mello, 2004) The church is used by politicians for their own interests. Politicians are careful in discussing critical issues like whether to legalize or not legalize gay marriages. They are cautious not to offend the people who will determine their stay in government through voting. Conclusion. Gay couples have their rights to be happy. Happiness in marriage would be with the person one is attracted to and willing to be intimate with. Denying gay couples that happiness and trying to impose the person they should marry in terms of gender would be depriving them their rights. The government should ensure that the rights of all citizens are preserved. If gay marriages were legalized the HIV-AIDS prevalence would decline. This is because gay couples would increase their commitment towards their marriages. Forcing people to marry those they are not attracted to is a major reason for increased divorce rates. References: Austin Cline. 2007. Gay Marriage and church/state separation. Retrieved on 16th October 2007 from http://atheism. about. com/6/9/007160. html Leah Moore. 2001. Points in defense of gay marriages. Retrieved on 16th October 2007 from http://angelfire. com/home /leah/index. html USA Today. 2007. When it comes to gay rights, Is Cuba ahead of USA? Retrieved on 16th October 2007 from http://asp. usatoday. com/community/utils/idmap/13917955. story Mello, Michael. 2004. Legalizing gay marriages. University Press. Pierceson, Jason, Courts: 2005. Liberalism and Rights: Gay Law and Politics in the