The government says that every citizen of the United States shall receive equal rights.
Then, why did they pass the Defense of Marriage Act? The Defense of Marriage Act prohibits
the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages; in my opinion this act is unjust and immoral because it restricts the rights of gay and lesbian citizens. Many of the reasons
offered for opposing gay marriage are based on the assumption that gays have a choice in
who they can feel attracted to, and the reality is very different. Many people actually believe
that gays could simply choose to be heterosexual if they wished. Others believe that the
act of homosexuality is selfish because homosexuals want relationships with people
that they supposedly cannot have. In reality, it has nothing to do with choice. It has to do
with true feelings and emotion towards someone else. It has to do with love.
Same-sex marriage is an important issue with gay couples and
activists in today's society. Religious, government, and social groups have debated
this issue and it is taking a long time for it to be resolved. Same-sex marriage has
some distinct facts and values important to one's religion, morals, or even what
his or her family thinks of the gay lifestyle.
One strong argument states that Marriage is an institution between
one man and one woman. This is the most popular argument, It was made clear
in a recently passed U.S. federal law. The Defense of Marriage Act, which I mentioned earlier.
Who says what marriage is to be defined by? The people who are married? The people
who are allowed to be married?? I think that if the straight community cannot give or prove a
good reason to deny the institution of marriage to gay people, then it shouldn't be denied
period. Denying marriage to gay people is an act or expression of prejudice.
One of the most contradictory arguments would be that Same-sex
marriage would threaten the institution of marriage. Let me explain why this is contradictory .
Threaten marriage? How can you threaten marriage by allowing people to marry? That is not
logical to me. If you allow gay people to marry each other, you no longer force them to marry
people to whom they feel little attraction for, with whom they most often cannot relate sexually.
You then end up reducing the number of supposed heterosexual marriages that end up in the
divorce courts. No one would require you or anyone else to participate in a gay marriage
right ? You have freedom of choice, of choosing what kind of marriage to participate in. So
why not give a gay person that choice too. I think we would be better off if we tightened the
divorce laws rather then totally prohibit a marriage. Instead of stopping people from making
bonds, why don't we stop people from breaking bonds. That makes more sense to me.
Another argument states that Marriage is for procreation.
This argument is ridiculous because people forget that while straight couples can
procreate, not all of them choose to do so. Therefore to say that gay couples are
wrong because they cannot bring life into this world makes no sense. Also there are some
straight couples who aren't able to procreate. Does this mean that they must give up
their wedding rings now? I think that this argument makes no sense because it totally
ignores the fact that straight people have procreation problems too.
On a similar note, some people argue that marriages are for ensuring
the continuation of the species. I do not think that the human species is in any real
danger of dying out through lack of procreation. If ten percent of all the human race
were to suddenly refrain from procreation, I think it is safe to say that the world would
probably be better off. One of the world's most serious problems is overpopulation .
Gays would be doing the world a favor by...