The title of my essay might indicate that I am one who would personally benefit from the legalization of gay marriage, but the topic of this debate has little or no direct relevance to my sexual orientation. The pending decision does, however, affect my lifestyle, as I am friends with several gay persons, as well as their partner, should they have one. In her essay, "Gay Marriage, an Oxymoron," conservative, homophobic Lisa Schiffren claims that the basis for society to have developed and support the "institution" of marriage as we know it is for people to breed and raise children in the standardized and accepted fashion. Her claim is that gay marriages should not be legalized because it is too drastic a redefinition to society's meaning of marriage. More specifically, gay marriage negates the most essential element of legal marriage, the bearing and raising of children. She weakly attempts to elaborate her argument based on the following five grounds: religion, social reform or change, the importance of children in marriage, AIDS, and the fairness of legal benefits. I think that gay marriages should be legalized and feel that children have little to do with whether their parents are married homosexuals, are married heterosexuals, or are a married couple who simply do not have children at all.
Schiffren mentions how religion, specifically Judeo-Christian beliefs, is a key influence on society's moral norms of family life. Needless to say, the Church does not support homosexuality, and that is putting it mildly. Now, this may sound like a weak rebuttal that I am making, but times are changing and there is a notion of separating religion and state, not that this really changes how society in general thinks and judges any "odd balls." Do all the Judeo-Christians in America need some proof as an act of God to convince them why he suddenly approves of homosexual unions? That would be what we call a miracle. With a conservative President Bush in office,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document