In nature, the majority of people are normally attracted to corresponding people of the opposite sex. Therefore, this basically means that the male individuals are drawn to their female counterpart. Even though, heterosexual relationships are common in the current society and have been in practice since time immemorial, but there has emerged a new set of relationships which are between two people who are from the same sex. Such people are termed as being gay, and they have been fighting to be recognized and awarded the go ahead to marry one another. Gay marriage and fights to legalize it in the country are doing more harm to the society and the country as a whole since it worsens the society’s morals, and it has been noted to be a major facilitator of de-institutionalizing the marriage institution. The issue of same- sax marriage is not tolerated in many countries globally as they term it as against the convectional marriage institution, and this has seen even some people who came out publicly to announce intent to marry being sentenced to death by their respective countries and others are stoned and ridiculed by the public.
Nevertheless, several countries such as Portugal, Spain, Canada, Netherlands, and South Africa amongst others have legalized gay marriage, but this has always received criticism from the media and even religious institutions. Therefore, it is morally right and common sense to shun the practice of the same- sex marriage as it holds many negative consequences to the immediate family, and the community as a whole. Assume a society wholly composed of lesbian families for instance? Definitely such community would be lacking an important facet which is basically men. Hence it is from such point of view; this paper will discuss and analyze the reasons why gay marriage is bad for the family, community, and country in general. CONS It is fundamental to note that the institute of marriage is actually a religious sacrament.
In accordance with a statement approved by Pope John Paul II in 2003, marriage was originally established by God the Creator with purpose, essential properties, and its own nature. Therefore, there is not a philosophy that is able to wipe out from the humanity’s spirit the faith that matrimony subsists exclusively between a woman and a man (“The Vatican says no to same-sex marriages”.). The marriage institution has been defined conventionally as between a woman and a man. The Minnesota Supreme Court in October 1971 passed judgment on the Baker v.
Nelson case that the marriage institution was the unification of woman and man, and it exceptionally involves the reproduction and nurturing of offspring in a family and the process is as old as the Bible’s book of Genesis (“State Courts”). The acceptance of the same- sex marriage can prospectively lead downhill finishing with citizens in bestial, incestuous, polygamous, and even other non-conventional associations having the right to tie the knot. On 21st may 2008, a senior counsel argued in the Los Angeles Times that the lobby group for polyandry and polygamy was on the edge of using the triumph of gay marriage couples as a facilitator for more de-institutionalizing of marriage (Lavy). The issue of same-sex marriage is totally irreconcilable with the traditions, sacred texts, and beliefs of numerous religious association. The American Baptist churches, National association of Evangelicals, Southern Baptist Convention, United Methodist Church, Islam, Presbyterian Church, and even the Catholic Church have all been opposing gay marriage (Spilsbury).
Moreover, same- sex marriage will definitely direct to more kids being reared in same-sex families, which are not best settings for rising offspring as they require both a father and a mother. It has been reported that girls, who are reared in the absence of their fathers, are at elevated risks of premature sexual activity and also teen pregnancy. Children raised in an environment devoid of a mother are dispossessed of the unique advice and emotional security that comes with mothers. Another study published by the American Sociological Review in April 2001 revealed that kids who have gay or lesbian parents are additionally vulnerable to get engaged in homosexual conduct (Coleus).
For the government, to accept gay marriage would definitely weaken the customary family values fundamental to our society. A thing that makes our society strong and acts as its building blocks is the conventional family of children, woman, and man. This basis is what has maintained us through the Great Depression, terrorist attacks, two devastating world wars, and many other challenges and calamities over the several centuries. Friends and lovers come, and leave, but family is always at hand. The key reason why our values and culture has begun crumbling is due to the failing of the family unit. Hence the introduction of another type of “family” would actually make the condition worse (Alexander et al.
).The lifestyle associated with gay marriage is full of promiscuity and numerous researches have revealed that such life is accompanied by many health risks, psychological disorders, and lowered life expectancy. For instance, it has been found that homosexuals have a reduced life expectancy of about 20 years due to the unhealthy lifestyles they live (Deem). This lifestyle is a formula for transmitting ailments and also generating a contagion.
The epidemic of HIV/AIDS has for a long time now remained a largely gay concern in the country mainly due to the greater level of promiscuity amongst the gay couples. A research, carried out from 1986-1990, indicated that most of the young aged gay men had a greater chance of close to 50% of becoming infected with HIV/AIDS by the age of 55. Moreover, some of these couples get complicated illnesses, and this raises their health costs, and in turn the health insurance premiums would rise considerably. Also, health premiums ought to hike further if all the insurance firms are ordered to cover the fertility medical treatment for all the lesbian couples (Diggs). In the United States, the institution of marriage has been suffering extremely high rates of divorce actually between 40-50% (“Marriage and Divorce”) and moreover experiencing high birthrate of about 40.
8% kids being born to single or rather unmarried mothers as of 2010 (FASTSTATS). For this reason, permitting couples of same-sex to tie the knot would additionally weaken the marriage institution. The establishment of the same sex marriages completely confuses kids on the issue of expectations of the society and also gender roles and further on the procreation concept. Children learn about gender roles and expectations from learning institutions as well as the society; and, it becomes quite difficult to educate them on traditions and the importance of the family unit since massive confusion has been thrust on them. Therefore, the growing population will be a confused one and without the basic knowledge on the family unit which will throw our country into dark times.
The people of the U.S. must not have their hard earned tax dollars utilized to support some doings they find morally wrong. Same- sex marriage would basically warrant the gay duo to usual marriage reimbursement including coverage through a partner’s health insurance plan, getting social security compensations from a departed spouse, and also asserting a tax exception for a partner. The office of Congressional Budget on 17th December, 2009 revealed estimates showing that the cost of expanding employment benefits and allowances to the similar sex family spouses of definite federal human resources to the national government would be about USD 302 million on open spending and USD 596 million on fixed spending between 2010-2019 (Lucas). The adoption of same- sex marriage is bound to accelerate the incorporation of homosexuals into the conventional heterosexual civilization.
The homosexual community has formed its own vivacious culture. Therefore, by dropping the fissure of experiences and opportunities between homosexual and heterosexual community, this distinctive culture stops to be present. Lee Badgett reviews marriage as assuming heterosexual structures of family and surrendering specific gay family structures and conceivably even lesbian and gay culture. The act of marriage is typically not a human right. The general public can probably choose to approve certain categories of sexual provisions and give sustenance in the configuration of benefits to such arrangements.
Matrimony was formed to permit society to sustain heterosexual pair in reproduction and thus the society can decide not to grant similar benefits to gay couples. Marriage ought not to be expanded to cover gay couples simply because same- sex relationships have completely nothing at all to do with reproduction. For that reason, only allowing same-sex marriage will further change the rationale of marriage from reproduction and rearing kids to adult satisfaction or rather gratification which is totally unacceptable in the present society. Moreover, allowing or rather enacting a law permitting same-sex marriage will amplify the number of non-serious or joke marriages in the society, like for instance a couple of acquaintances who just desire to accumulate on taxes.
Therefore it only makes biological sense if marriage is left for only between a man and a woman since they are the only ones capable of procreating. The acceptation of same- sex marriage by the law would ensure that all gay couples get legal preferences so as to adopt children due to their incapability to produce offspring. In this case, same-sex couples would be awarded super rights, which will highly surpass the rights of the common citizen. Unfortunately, kids would be treated as medals that, as a result, are used to authenticate gay marriages.The issue of gay marriage is totally not a universal right, and thus conjoining the matter with interracial marriage is extensively ambiguous.
This concept was best explained by Matthew Staver whereby he clearly informed the public that the merging features of the guarded classes in the 1964 Civil Rights Act included: unchallengeable characteristics, prevalent discrimination, and a record of longstanding. Therefore in no scenario does sexual orientation come up or rather meet up any of the mentioned objective criteria highlighted in the traditionally protected universal rights categories (Staver). Conclusion Same- sex marriage debate has been going on in the U.S. for the past several decades, and this has seen some States adopt or rather put into constitution the gay marriage rights and legalize it. However from time immemorial the marriage institution has been defined conventionally as between a woman and a man thus at no time should that definition be changed.
Gay marriage has been noted to be dangerous to growing kids as most of them tend to have premature sexual activities and also adopt their parent’s lifestyles. Moreover, the basic of our society, which is the family, faces extinction with the introduction of other unconventional forms of families. Also, it is important to bear in mind that the institution of marriage is sacred, and God made it for a man and a woman. Therefore, since the issue of the same sex has been known to bring negative impact to the society, especially to the marriage institution; it ought to be abolished so as to save our traditional family status from extinction.
