Pro – by Sarah Rolufs
Gay marriage is currently one of the most debated topics in American politics. Conservatives and Liberals have been unable to see eye to eye on the issue and continue argue over the rights guaranteed to homosexuals under the constitution. Basic human rights, at least to me, constitute the very basis of the “American idea”.
To deny them from any person based on race, gender or sexual preference, is perhaps the most unpatriotic and un-American idea in existence. Marriage should, without a doubt, be one of these rights and should be granted to every American citizen. The evident Republican arguments against gay marriage extend from Biblical reasons (ahem, separation of Church and State anyone?) to the idea that same-sex marriage would threaten “traditional marriage” and the “sacred institution”. Yes, as arguments, they are illogical. But the truth is kids, more than anything, the denial of same-sex marriage is an issue of discrimination stemming from fear and misunderstanding.
To deny same-sex marriage based on the biblical definition of the word is to force your religious beliefs into my government and upon the rights of others. If I recall correctly, the 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of religion, which also means freedom from religion. But what you’re telling me is that America, this supposed “melting pot” of cultures and lifestyles and religions, must base some of its most significant laws determining human rights on Christian ideas? What about certain sects of Buddhism, for example, that openly celebrate same-sex relationships and would love to have the authority to make gay marriages legal? Their religious freedom is being infringed. Their rights are being stripped away and yet you still say you believe in religious freedom. Where is the justice in that? Christianity isn’t wrong, not at all. It just shouldn’t be any more significant in determining laws than any other religion. But if you’re convinced that Americans recognize the Bible as acceptable legal doctrine and the basis for the sacred institution of marriage, maybe you should read the parts that definite this “institution” again – including all the inconvenient passages that not only permit but also sometimes require polygamy or even involuntary marriage.
The next in invalid argument is the idea that same-sex marriage threatens “traditional marriage”. Who defines what a “traditional” marriage is? To zealously declare the significance of “traditional marriage”, while at the same time allowing its destruction through the modern concept of divorce, clearly illustrates that “traditional” marriage doesn’t mean very much. Homosexuals are denied the right to be happily married, while there is a 50% divorce rate among “traditional households”. Nobody has any intention of changing what heterosexual marriage means. Heterosexuals can marry (and divorce) at will – they will not be affected by the institution of gay marriage in the slightest. And what about children adopted by gay or lesbian parents? Just because their parents are gay doesn’t mean they will grow up with a gender identity crisis or form homosexual preferences. Apparently Christian Conservatives are still convinced that being gay is a choice. The more gay couples that are married means the more underprivileged orphans that have a home. The Census Bureau concluded that twenty-five percent of children today are born out-of-wedlock to single women, mostly young, minority, and impoverished; half of all marriages end in divorce; and married couples with children now make up only twenty-six percent of United States households. It is unrealistic to say all children should be raised in this idealized version of the American family.
In America we are entitled to, as an unalienable right, the right to pursue our happiness. To deny same-sex marriage is to deny this happiness from a large demographic. They should be entitled to all the same benefits as any other couple. Times are changing and society is changing. Allowing same-sex marriage has become a civil rights issue because prejudice still exists. Something has to change. And if your strongest argument is that allowing for the legalization of gay marriage is one step closer to leading America down that “slippery slope” of moral decay, consider this: convicted murderers, child molesters, rapists, known pedophiles, drug dealers, sex traffickers, black market gun dealers, etc., have the right to get married and do so all the time. So, where’s the outrage? Of course there isn’t any, and that lack of outrage illustrates their real motives. This is an intolerance and anti-gay issue, not a pro marriage or child protection issue, no matter what the politicians spew out.
Anti – Andrew Barnes
Same-sex marriage should not be allowed in the United States. It completely undercuts the norm of heterosexual marriage, which has clearly worked fine for as long as marriage has been around.
One of the biggest issues with the gay marriage is that once they are married, they are allowed to adopt, whether it is two guys or two girls. If they adopt, the child is going to missing out on good parenting. Every kid needs a mom and a dad. Research shows that when kids have a strong father figure in the home, against when kids grow up with their single mom, there is a major decrease in antisocial behavior, delinquency in boys, and sexual activity in girls.
The mother is just as important to the upbringing of a child as the father is. Mothers excel in providing children with emotional security and in reading the physical and emotional needs of infants. Just like when the father has to have “the talk” with his son, the mother plays the same role with the daughter in providing counsel in the emotional, physical, and social challenges of adolescence. It would be nearly impossible for two homosexual men to be able to connect with a girl they were raising on these subjects. Plus there would be the awkwardness of it not being another girl.
Not only do a mother and a father aid in the categories listed above, but also children raised in a homosexual household are more likely than ones raised in heterosexual household to exhibit gender and sexual disorders. Boys and girls have enough trouble worrying about cooties when they are growing up, what’s going to happen when they find out that both of their parents stayed away from the opposite sex their whole lives?
