Arguments for legalizing same-sex marriage in the United States

¶ … Gay Couples Be Allowed to Marry?

The debate on whether or not gay couples should be allowed to marry has been going on for quite a long period of time. In the modern society, heterosexuals marry for a variety of reasons including but not limited to financial benefits, love, and child bearing. Homosexuals should be allowed to marry for those same reasons.

The relevance of the institution of marriage cannot be overstated. Indeed, it is through this very institution that people of the age of majority express (and celebrate) not only their devotion but also their commitment to each other. It is also through this institution that people find fulfillment to their emotional, financial, social, or physical needs. In that regard, there exists a need to ensure that two consenting adults are not barred from marrying on the basis of their gender.

Should Gay Couples Be Allowed to Marry?

The support for gay marriage has been on an upward trend in the recent past (Knox and Schacht 240). Indeed, recent polls show that members of the public are increasingly becoming more tolerant towards gay marriages. If these trends are anything to go by, gay marriages could soon become legal across the U.S. (and indeed across the entire world). In the U.S., gay marriages as Hallowell points out are currently legal in a total of nine states. Gay marriages are also increasingly being embraced across the entire world.

Recognizing Dissenting Views

In seeking to present a strong case for the legalization of gay marriage, it would be prudent for me to recognize the various arguments that have been presented in the past in opposition to same-sex marriages. One such argument is that from a religious perspective (at least according to many religions), homosexual behavior is a sin. For this reason, any product of such a behavior including but not limited to same-sex marriage is a sin -- by default. According to Starr and McCormick, adherents of this point-of-view are of the opinion that the perfect order of creation is violated by homosexuality and for this reason; the same is inherently ungodly (39-11). To back up their claims, those opposed to homosexuality according to the authors cite a number of biblical verses including but not limited to "Genesis 1:27-29, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13…." (39-11). Some of the religions that have taken a relatively strong stance against homosexuality and gay marriages include the Catholic Church and Islam. It is however important to note that from a critical perspective, this particular argument against gay marriage does not seem convincing enough. From the onset, it should be noted that everybody has a civil right to belong to a denomination of their choice. In the same way one chooses to be a Catholic, so can one elect to be an Atheist. No particular religious belief should be regarded a monopoly. We must never therefore force individuals to subscribe to our own religious beliefs. Indeed, as a sign of expanding religious tolerance, some religious organizations have in the past embraced the relevant reforms so as to support same-sex marriages. Such organizations according to Knox and Schacht include but they are not limited to the United Church of Christ (UCC) and the Quakers, with the latter being the largest Christian denomination to have endorsed the said unions in recent times (239). In basic terms, the U.S. cannot be regarded a theocracy and for this reason, the country should (and must) be governed only in accordance to the constitution.

Yet another argument that has been presented in opposition to gay marriages is that they provide a bad environment in which to raise children. Those in support of this point-of-view claim that the best familial environment in which to bring up a child is that comprising of male and female adults (Knox and Schacht 242). This they claim is the optimal or ideal nurturing environment in which children can truly learn the importance of gender roles. Taken to a higher level, it is also argued that a child can only be born in a heterosexual union, i.e. In a union between a man and a woman, and hence any other union is unnatural. For this reason, those opposed to same sex marriages are convinced that such unions should not be endorsed by being granted legal recognition. Like many other positions that have been presented in opposition to gay marriages, this argument is also largely defective. In the past, several studies have clearly demonstrated that children of heterosexual couples are no different from children raised in a same-sex marriage setting. In one such study, "no differences were found between children raised by heterosexual or same-sex parents in the following four areas: Cognitive development, psychological adjustment, gender identity, or sexual preference partners" (Fiona 36). For this reason therefore, same-sex couples can also "bear" children via adoption and proceed to raise them in a familial environment that is no different from that of a heterosexual couple. As Wardle, Strasser, Duncan, and Coolidge note, in some ways, i.e. when it comes to appreciating the diverse world in which we live in, children of same-sex parents could be better off than those from heterosexual households (37).

Conclusion

Approximately 4 decades ago, the U.S. Supreme Court made a ruling that effectively led to the legalization of interracial marriages which until then were deemed illegal. In permitting marriages between interracial couples, the Supreme Court dealt a fatal blow to one of the worst forms of discrimination thus further expanding the civil rights of individuals in the society. The legalization of gay marriages will be yet another blow to minority discrimination. For the reasons presented in this text, the relevance of legalizing gay marriages cannot hence be overstated.