In the recent years, an increasing number of the numerous issues that place global constraints have been the topic of gay marriage and its legalization. This issue has strained not only legal firms, constitutional reforms, and other significant law efforts but also put pressure on religious and other public institutions as well as a particular reference to the issues on morality. For this reason, several countries have endorsed the issue of gay marriage. The world has been experiencing a significant problem in fighting for morality and at the same time granting gay couples their rights. The basis of legalization has found its roots in the constitutional right of presenting everyone with their fundamental rights and protecting equality. However, numerous states have not identified the issue on gay marriage and still maintain the outdated opinion of marriage being between heterosexual couples. This discussion has continued to cause a huge drift between opposers and proposers of the same leading to a global problem. The freedom of marriage should be made a fundamental right as argued by proposers. Gay marriage I believe should not be legalized.
Jason and Gill are great opposers of the discussion concerning gay marriages with support from religious models. In their study, they provide a documentation of all Judeo-Christian convictions that categorize gay unions as unnatural and sinful. Holy accounts of the Quran and the Bible evidently prohibit homosexual unions and further discuss how marriage is meant to be between heterosexual couples. Gill & Jason’s statistics prove that about 60 percentile of homosexual unions, are spread out in American. To oppose the issue of gay marriage, relevant authorities and political structures have developed strategies to help terminate homosexual unions. Gill and Jason provide an example of the Marriage Defense Act of 1996, which majored in the search of prohibiting homosexual unions.
In America, President George Bush Federal Amendment Act declared a proposition to extinguish gay unions throughout America. Gill and Jason note that legalizing gay marriage separates the traditional concept of the marriage institution from its culture and societal principles plus further eroding the community’s constructive impact. Ultimately, this book develops a specific ethical argument on gay marriages and the individual marriage rights. The points of view presented in this discussion are discussed in a moral manner. It is evident from this discussion that Gay Unions are not only a global problem but a threat to culture and morality. Therefore, gay unions must not be permitted, and existing ones should be banned Eskridge & Spedale 1).
Focusing on the global problem discussion of managing gay relationships there is a presentation of a common issue in the conversation of gay marriages and explains how strenuous the issue has become in global institutions (LifeSiteNews.com). Among other problems facing the world in the present, the issue of gay marriage has presented the society with a much greater challenge considering the issue of equality and the right to perform activities that are pleasant to oneself (Barreiro-Carambula 1). The authors of this article present an argument against same-sex marriages in a bid to maintain morality and take a religious standing point on the same issue. Discussing the central idea on why gay marriages should be banned, this article presents the idea of gay marriage ban from the point of child adoption. God gives children to marriages when he feels like they are in need of one. Thus, if gay couples go ahead and adopt they could be going against God’s wishes.
A different point developed by the author is that every child should be brought up by the father and the mother, not individuals who are trying to assume father and mother roles in the name of gay marriages. A mother and a father figure present the child with a natural upbringing. Therefore, not only do gay marriages go against natural ways of child upbringing but also messes up with the same children brought up in the same environment. The United States Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith and major institutions not only oppose same-sex marriage adoption but wish that individuals maintain God-given natural laws.
However, many activists have mentioned the equality of both stands; one option is not as good as the other one. The argument presented by Craig and his colleagues discusses the issue of gay coupling which implies that the society has condoned and encouraged gay marriages. According to them, the practice could worsen the trends of life and family. The world to the present has seen a decline in marriage institutions which has resulted in the increase of families brought up by single mothers and the trend keeps on increasing. Therefore, gay marriages should be banned because they have a likelihood of intensifying this problem as a commitment to a woman has now been a lifestyle choice (Almanzar 1). The thesis developed by these authors is that legalizing gay marriages reduces the world to a point of no moral consideration and, therefore, there will be no legal institutions to make us abide.
Factual statistics publications about the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that was passed in 1996 also expose the immorality behind legalizing gay unions (AccessWorldNews.com 1). This act morally defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. This act has evidently recognized the problem brought about by the discussion of legalizing gay marriages. The world’s morals have been interfered with due to the present discussions. Moreover, law procedures are crippled when it comes to the debate about legalizing gay marriages. The author of this article, however, is in disapproval of the act as she provides reasons to repeal it through the perspective of past cases.
Nevertheless, the author acknowledges how gay marriages have negatively influenced our society. She presents a claim that to make this discussion complete and eliminate the issue of gay marriage from world problems; law making institutions should grant homosexual marriages equal rights as heterosexual marriages. She opposes the act because the act in itself is in support of equality and everyone being given equal rights yet it turns a blind eye when it comes to the issue of gay unions. This article is useful in research because it presents a different view from the view of opposers. Subsequently, the author of this article makes a point to show how to make gay unions, not a global issue anymore by giving equal rights to everyone (Kurdek 881). I still believe there are better ways to end this issue than giving rights to gay couples, and so gay marriages should still be banned.
The media also provide exposure to the immorality of this issue by proving current statistics that puts the world at a higher risk and makes a suggestion of the situation becoming worse if the trend is not cut short (“Statistics” 1). This website informs the readers of the disturbing information and statistics about children raised without a father. Evidently, the figures presented are alarming and call upon governmental and public support to help cut the continuing trend. Further, the article looks at the effects that normal unions have on children and the effects that gay marriages have on children (Carpenter & Gates 580). The facts of the results are worrying because of the emotional, psychological and behavioral consequences that gay marriages have on children and the prediction of how the society will look like in the future with this worrying trend. Therefore, it is believed that from the disturbing statistics and figures, it is contrary to people to keep supporting gay marriages and every existing gay marriage should be banned to protect our future and the future generations.
RE: Gay Marriage Laws and the Constitution
Question Presented:
Should Gay marriages be legalized? Gay activists claim that they should be granted their rights just like heterosexual unions¸ what does the constitution say about this issue? Should the court be compelled to impose the views of the minority to the opinions of the majority? What are other restrictive measures that the court can take to reduce gay marriages? Because the parties involved in the consequences of gay marriages are mostly the adopted children. What child rights does the court have to protect and what is the ultimate law about allowing Gay marriages?
Facts
There is nothing that the world needs than all countries to redefine the issue of marriage. The only way to establish this is by declaring that marriage can only exist between a man and a woman. Marriage is based on the natural truth that women and men are distinctively complementary. The biological fact that reproduction is fully dependent on the aspect of being a man and a woman and the social reality is that every child should be brought up by a father figure and a mother figure and not gay couples who try to assume these roles. Therefore, all states, all legal bodies, and all other involved public institutions have the right to make marriage policies basing on these facts.
Discussion
The opposing side has developed an argument that gay marriages should not be legalized with considerations of morals and other natural aspects as opposed to the proposing side which demands that they also deserve the right to engage in any marriage decision that they make. To succeed on this claim, the opposing side has managed to take more than a natural, Christian and moral view of the issue and to some extent has succeeded to win the discussion. On the other side, the proposing side is only dependent on the issue of individual rights. The biggest challenge still lies in the future. Therefore, it will take more than a global effort to end the discussion.
Conclusion
For the reasons that are best known to the court, legal institutions and other relevant law defining institutions, activists should be able to overcome all their thoughts towards developing a society with the presence of gay unions. Natural, social, moral, biological, constitutional, religious and other elements are not in support of the gay union legalization idea.
Works Cited
"Statistics." The Fatherless Generation. Web. 12 March 2016. <http://thefatherlessgeneration.wordpress.com/statistics/>.
Almanzar, Yolanne. "Florida Gay Adoption Ban Is Ruled Unconstitutional." The New York Times. 25 Nov 2008. Web. 15 March 2016. <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/26/us/26florida.html?_r=0>.
Barreiro-Carambula, Monsignor Ignacio. "Why homosexual adoption is not a right." LifeSiteNews.com. 11 Apr 2011. Web. 15 March 2016. <http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/why-homosexual-adoption-is-not-a-right/>.
Carpenter, Christopher, and Gary Gates. “Gay and Lesbian Partnership: Evidence from California.” Demography 45.3 (2008): 573-590. Print
Craig, Stephen, Martinez Michael, Kane James, and Gainous Jason. “Core Values, Value Conflict and Citizens’ Ambivalence about Gay Rights.” Political Research Quarterly 58.1 (2005): 5-17. Print.
Eskridge, William, and Darren Spedale. Gay Marriage: For Better or Worse? What We've Learned from the Evidence. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 2006. Print.
Gill, Emily, and Jason Pierceson. Moral Argument, Religion, and Same-Sex Marriage. Maryland, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009. Print.
Kurdek, Lawrence. “Are Gay and Lesbian Cohabiting Couples Different from Heterosexual Married Couples?” Journal of Marriage and Family 66.4 (2004): 880-900. Print.
LifeSiteNews.com. Why homosexual adoption is not a right (2011) Retrieved March 112th, 2016 from <http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/why-homosexual-adoption-is-not-a-right/>.
Wetzstein, Cheryl. "Appeals Court Hears Case for Gay Marriage - Equal Protection under the Law Cited for Striking down Federal Ban." The Washington Times [DC] 05 Apr. 2012: A06. Access World News. News Bank. Web. 12 March. 2016.
