Same-sex Marriage Analysis Essay
Marriage is defined as the union between a man and a woman. Gays make up less
than 2% of the population. They should not be allowed to redefine society’s traditional values
by obtaining permission to be legally married. A minority should not dictate the acceptable
moral codes of society. Legalizing same sex marriages would allow the majority to succumb to
the minority. It will grant homosexuals special rights, and contradicts the beliefs of the Catholic
Church. There are also many physical disadvantages of homosexual sex and if couples decide to have children it will place the children in a bad environment. We must also consider the falsehood of monogamy in same sex relationships and the immoral ways of promiscuity.
Marriage is not only a matter of emotions but it is also a legal, social, economic, and
spiritual union between a heterosexual couples. The definition of marriage does not include
homosexuals, to engage in a marriage one must fit the qualifications. Society can get along
without homosexuality but it cannot get along without marriage. In 1885, the Supreme Court felt
so strongly that marriage was to be protected that it declared it as a requirement for admission of
new states to the Union. Any, prospective state, the court said, had to have law resting “on the
basis of the idea of family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and
one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in
our civilization, the best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent
progress in social and political improvement.”(Rotello, 56). Once we grant them marriage rights
who knows what we can alter. We might as well eliminate minimum age or any other kind of
restrictions. Homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals. They can vote, own property,
and so on but they cannot receive any special treatment beyond these rights. If gay marriages
become the norm then businesses would be required to provide “family” health benefits to same sex couples. Children would also need to be taught in schools that homosexual sex is a moral
equivalent of marital love. Same sex marriage would facilitate the adoption of children by gay
couples and sex based distinctions in the law would have to be removed. Any attempt of
adjusting the rules is an attempt to gain special rights, not equal ones.
The Catholic Church believes that homosexuality is a sin. The Bible preaches that it is
wrong and unnatural. Here is some specific evidence from the Bible on same sex
“If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is
detestable.” (Lev. 20:13)
“God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations
for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and
were inflamed with lust for one another.” (Rom. 1:26, 27).
“Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male
prostitutes nor homosexual offenders, nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers
nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9, 10).
The “right” vision of marriage is clearly illustrated throughout the bible. The image is
described in Genesis 1:28, in which man and woman become two-in-one-flesh and are
commanded to be fruitful and multiply, accords on the highest level with this notion of love.
There are also many physical disadvantages in participating in homosexual sex.
Heterosexual intercourse confers mutual physiological and endocrinological benefits that
heterosexual relationships cannot. Participating in heterosexual sex allows the husband and wife to exchange certain hormones and that can be very beneficial. Accordingly, F.X. Arnold has written: The transmission of the hormonal exchange appears to be part of the vital basis for the satisfying functioning of other physical and emotional processes which are necessary for a harmonious married life (Herder, 3). The swapping of hormones during sex results in normal functioning of the immune system. Male sperm contains an immunosuppressant and this suppresses the womans defense system just enough to allow the partners to achieve a two in one flesh union. From a strict immunological standpoint, male sperm and consequent embryos are seen as foreign bodies. The purpose of the immune system is to protect the body against anything that is foreign to it. The immunosuppressant contained in sperm changes that and enables a true and complete union between the husband and wife and then the embryo and the mother. The immonosuppressant instructs the females system to treat both her husbands sperm and her future unborn child not as agents against which she must defend but as agents with which she is to be united (http://galegroup.com). Homosexual sex disrupts the normal operation of the immune system. Among the adverse effects is the possibility of also contracting AIDS, which in time renders the immune system dysfunctional. AIDS runs prevalent in the gay community. AIDS was first established among sexually promiscuous homosexuals. It was initially called GRID, standing for Gay Immunodeficiency Disease.
Tolerating gay marriages will also spark the issue of having children. Naturally some couples will want to have children and children do not benefit when homosexuality is presented as a neutral or positive lifestyle choice. Children thrive in an atmosphere of commitment and stability. Kids need the role models of both father and mother for their complete development. Children are a vital part of the future stability of society. Society greatly encourages marriages in order to ensure that enough children are born and that these children are raised properly. The sexual revolution broke the bonds between marriage, sex, and children. This weakened the idea of marriage has led to widespread acceptance of homosexuality. The revolution enabled adults to separate sex from children and relieve themselves of binding commitments to one another and a sense of responsibility. Having same sex marriages would further erode marriages. Marriages are miserably failing these days as is. Once the sexual revolution broke out the bridge between mother, father, and children collapsed. The ideas of living together, open marriages, single parenthood, the possibility of abortion and birth control all surfaced. The traditional family consisting of a husband, wife, and natural children is the only way societies have ever found of providing well for stability in the present and for the future. All these new changes and possibilities demolished our understanding of what marriage really is. When children are taken out of the successful traditional marriage environment they are more subject to criminal behaviour, premarital sexual relations, abortions, behavioural problems, and divorce once they marry. Birthrates are at a barely comfortable replacement level and and fewer and fewer children are being brought up with well established just morals.
Homosexuality is destructive to an individuals emotional, physical, and moral well being, that is why it is discouraged in all successful cultures. Even in a steady relationship dangerous and risky sex occurs since the defining gay sex act is unhealthy by any standard. State sanction of homosexuality in any form is an invitation to experiment with something that may prove deadly in the end. Any public health benefits available by discouraging promiscuous homosexual activity may be achieved without redefining traditional marriage, which is an extremely important public health measure. Homosexual literature itself dubs that homosexual monogamy is largely fictional. Most gay relationships are fleeting. Those that last more thana few years do so just based on the fact that there was an agreement to have outside partners. As former New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan, a homosexual, writes, the openness of the contract of homosexual marriage reflects greater understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman.(Sullivan, 56). The homosexual concept of monogamy seems to be non-monogamous. Homosexual author and activist Michelangelo Signorile admits that the goal of gay activists is to fight for same sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to societys moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution(www.galegroup.com).
By tolerating homosexual marriages society will continue to be further demoralized. Homosexual relations and marriages are a huge moral, emotional, and above all health risk. The sexual activities that gays participate in are immoral and hold huge risks but to the light like contracting AIDS and many other biological hormonal disadvantages. It would redefine thousands of years of marital traditions and be the fuel to help marriages continue to crumble. Also being raised in a homosexual household is harmful to an individual and the idea of same sex relationships goes against most religions.
/ Pages : 1,470 / 24