Yet this preferred to a gay couple free of criminal history that in fact does embrace morals? If a same-sex couple can provide a loving and caring home, then where is harm done? The child, as well as the love for the child, must be a priority in every family, no matter the gender of the parents. Gay marriage is defined as a legal union between members of the same sex. Ten percent of Americans, because of their sexual orientation are denied the right to marry.
Also, the ramifications of the legalization of gay marriage, both for gays and society, will be examined. Finally, I will refute arguments against same-sex marriage. Society benefits by having fewer "closet gays." "Closet gays" are homosexuals who try to abide by society's standards, and marry a partner of the opposite sex (Harbinger 683). However, due to the different sexual orientations of the two partners, problems often occur, causing emotional harm to"closet gays," their partners, and their children (Harbinger 683).
In my synthesis there are topics that relate to Bennett and how he doesn’t have a strong enough back up to say who should and shouldn’t get married. In the essay, “Let Gays Marry,” by Andrew Sullivan, there were a few main arguments stated. In the document, Sullivan claims that gays and lesbians want the government to enable the law so it lets gays get married. They presented themselves in front of the Supreme Court and in fact, this was the first time they actually got some acknowledgment. Gays and lesbians are going to want to be together (some are lucky enough to meet that special someone), basically why not give them the right to be an equal citizen?
This being said, a great example of this would be a person that has mental retardation, they are still allowed to get married when they want to in their lives, so why not gay people. It is all the same, they are born this way; it is not a choice that they are able to make. I think that is a great way to show that our country really is diverse, that we see all people for people and not what their religion is, or who they love. Now I do think that there are some drawbacks to gay marriage. I think that gay marriage, or just two gays in a relationship c... ... middle of paper ... ... someone wanted them to, it just happens.
These two authors show separate feelings on the issue of gay marriage, while attempting to persuade the readers to agree with them. Each of these articles have valuable arguments, but will they be enough to change people’s views, to benefit their beliefs? Beginning with the topic on gay marriage and the controversial battle between authors, Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett, Sullivan is the gay supporter. In Sullivan’s piece, “Let Gays Marry,” he opens with a statement by the Supreme Court, “A state cannot deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws.” He feels that this simple sentence has so much meaning, saying that whatever type of person, male or female, black or white, everyone deserves the same legal protection and equal rights. Therefore, gay marriage should not be excluded from the legal system.
In his opinion, marriage is a connection of a husband and a wife. On the other hand, gay marriage is a damage of this society because he doesn’t think same sex marriage is actually a marriage. First of all, he believes “same sex marriages would do significant, long term social damage” (Bennett 177). At this point, I don’t agree with him because in my opinion, gay people do not harm the society except decreasing population in a passive action but it is not the main deterioration to be long term or significant. As everyone knows, beside gay marriage, abortion is also the hot issue of the world especially with the religion today.
This is almost completely unsupported. He even concedes that romantic marriage forms the majority of marriages today in the west, but immediately denounces the romantic aspect of marriage. It is pretty easy to tear down his argument that this sho... ... middle of paper ... ...ouple cannot. There is no reason gay people should not be allowed to marry if we allow non-gay couples who cannot produce children to marry. There is certainly historical precedent to only allowing straight couples to marry, but since our current concept of marriage has changed so much since that was relevant, we should strongly consider giving gay people the right to marry.
Another anti-homosexual is Peter S. Sprigg, MDiv, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council had the following to say about same sex marriage: “Marriage is a public instit... ... middle of paper ... ...ith determination and uniting can they achieve the same rights as heterosexuals. No one should have their rights overlooked and that includes homosexuals. And in the end as sad as it sounds if anti-homosexuals could look at the monetary benefits to the economy, they would see that gay marriage is not as bad as they think. If there is ever a vote for same-sex marriage in your state, what will you vote for? Works Cited ProCon.org.
He came here because it was the land of the free. If we discriminate against same-sex marriage and gays in overall we are not the true land of the free because they are not going to be able to love freely (Sullivan). Discriminating against same-sex marriage can hurt people. I conducted an interview with my brother which who is gay. I asked him questions about how long he’s kept this secret to himself, if he suffered from bullying, did this affect your family members, and do you ever want to get married some day.