Legal and social aspects of same-sex marriage

Marriage of Homosexuals

Homosexual Marriage

The practice of homosexuality might be perceived as offensive to some; others might view this act as a violation of their culture and of their religious preferences. Still others view homosexuality as a threat to the institution of a traditional marriage. While the objection to homosexuality and homosexual marriage might range in its content, the one thing should be considered is the level of freedom that individuals are allotted to make their own decisions. If two people have certain personal preferences that do not physically harm anyone else then what kind of control should be exerted over their own personal decisions? Does the majority or lawmakers have the right to infringe on personal freedoms just because they don't agree with personal choices? I argue that the state has no right whatsoever to deny freedoms to this class of individuals simply on the basis that it is not does not agree with their personal preferences. Furthermore, if such a bias is upheld and allowed to continue then it would undoubtedly and eventually infringe upon all of our rights. We would be left with a rather narrow range of choices in which we would be able to choose the way in which we live our lives; furthermore such a limited range of choices should not exist in a free society.

II. Body

A. Supporting Evidence

There are several different possibilities of sexual preference that are genetic composition allows for humans. Some heterosexuals are known as bi-curious since they fantasize or are commonly attracted to members of the same sex; while others are homosexual and fantasize about members of the opposite sex. The genetic composition of an individual does not seem to dictate their sexual orientation however it does seem to provide instances of predisposition to such behaviors, allowing for a range of behaviors which could be skewed to include homosexuality (Abbott, 2011). Furthermore scientists have found similar behaviors among several other species. Thus to say that homosexuality was unnatural would be a stretch of the imagination by any means.

B. Supporting Evidence

There may also be evidence that homosexuality is either completely or at least partially supported or empowered by cultural preferences (Carlos, 2010). Different cultures have different preferences toward gender roles in regards to sexuality. Therefore there may be a cultural component to homosexuality. Given the evidence of a genetic predisposing, this can also be coupled with the fact that culture plays a role, this serves as legitimate evidence that the development of homosexuality isn't as simple as someone making a personal choice. The scale of the decision is undoubtedly beyond conscious decision for many individuals.

C. Supporting Evidence

Some researchers that are critical of same sex marriages argue that there are real moral differences between same sex couples as well as traditional marriage (Beyer, 2002). Thus the difference in morality justifies a differential treatment towards same sex couples and therefore they should not be allowed to marry. An example of such an argument would be that if a same sex couple raised a child that the social implications for that child could justify differential treatment. Yet on the other hand, this doesn't imply that the couple is actually engaged in anything that is fundamentally wrong. Rather that the culture surrounding the couple is ill-equipped to handle the phenomenon. Furthermore, if the same argument was produced about racial inequality and gender inequality then this would provide evidence for the failed logic behind such an argument. Just because the culture in general has a skewed view on the ethics surrounding such an occurrence doesn't necessarily imply that the occurrence itself is fundamentally wrong.

Conclusion