Queers

He examines the core arguments against homosexual sex such as: it is abnormal, the idea that homosexuals choose to be that way, it goes against the purpose of our sexual reproductive organs, it is disgusting and how it goes against biblical teachings. He first looks at the meaning of homosexual sex being “unnatural”. It is hard for him to claim that one definition of natural is right compared to another person’s. He does argue against the idea of natural law theorists by saying that many things that are important in our society are not natural, and there are many natural things that people detest. He says, “If the unnaturalness charge is to be more than empty rhetorical flourish, those who levy it must specify what they mean”(Shafer-Landau 239).

And this is what homosexual relationships are based on: mutual attraction, love and affection. Sex, in a committed homosexual relationship, is merely a means of expressing that love, just the same ... ... middle of paper ... ...o deny that the right to marriage whomever you may choose is constitutionally guaranteed. Homosexuals, targets of discrimination and social injustice, deserve to have equal opportunities and rights as every other person in America, homosexual or straight. Homosexual marriages are accepted already by the Constitution, and they offer nothing but economic and social benefits if legalized, therefore there is no real reason as to why homosexual marriages should not be legalized. Legg, Joshua.

Marriage is a privilege, not a right. Society can choose to endorse certain types of sexual arrangements and give support in the form of benefits to these arrangement. Marriage was created to allow society to support heterosexual couples in procreation and society can choose not to give the same benefits to same-sex couples. If “marriage” is red... ... middle of paper ... ...tion of marriage? Since it cannot produce children to further the society and break the “rules” of marriage, common sense would tell us that homosexuality is danger to institution of marriage.

Equality of Homosexual Rights Most American politicians believe that everyone should be treated equally especially because it is stated in the United States Declaration of Independence. Our founding fathers wrote these words to protect all individuals. Those Americans who abide by the rules and who are upstanding citizens have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, Americans who are not the typical heterosexual are restricted from their rights even if they are faithful citizens. Gay and lesbian couples are discriminated against and unfairly treated because of their sexual orientation.

Homosexuals deserve to have happiness and America being the land of the free should be able to offer them the freedom of being able to marry whoever they want to be with. same sex marriage should be legalized because it would offer homosexuals the freedom they deserve and it violates human rights. “In 2003 massachusetts supreme court ruled that states cannot deny marriage licenses to homosexual couples.” according to the proquest staff. The first state to legalize same sex marriage was massachusetts. “some suggested that americans weren’t ready to embrace gay men and lesbians as equal with respect to the right of marriage” theodore and david boies said in their article ( Marriage Debate: Gays Deserve Equal Rights).

“The real question that should be debated is not whether gay marriage should be allowed, but rather, is marriage something we need anymore?” this quote was said by David Vaklis addressing that if people aren’t going to accept homosexuals, then why should we have marriage. The debate is whether people will accept homosexuals, and, will gay marriages be legalized across the United States and not just in certain areas. Even though it is against traditional marriage religion, gay marriage shall be legalized because being in love with the same sex shouldn’t be a problem and why shouldn’t everyone be treated equally. People are against it because of the “image” of our country if we legalize it worldwide, how America as a nation would look. This could start so many new problems but solve many.

Homosexual people deserve the same respect, dignity, love, and rights as anyone else. They should not be denied a formal relationship. It is in no way wrong to be gay and people do not recognize the extent of negativity gay or lesbian people must endure. America is the land of the free, but we are not free to marry whoever we want. We are equals in this world despite any race and cultural background we may carry.

Making homosexuality “normal” or displaying queer characters as anything other than being different, unnatural, or closeted threatens heterosexuality. Displaying homosexuality as normal would mean that homosexual men could be more than just effeminate males that are attracted to other males. That is why Kuhar claims, “the homosexual became a normal citizen, yet still a member of a clearly distinct social minority, one that indeed should be tolerated but only as long as it does not challenge heterosexual domination”(Kuhar, 90). This means we only tolerate homosexuality in society and in television shows because it does not threaten heterosexuality. Heterosexuality allows homosexuality to be

Marriage is a union of love, not a union of genders. Same-sex couples should be allowed to publicly celebrate their commitment in the same way as heterosexual couples. It should be legal because the gay community should have the same rights as everyone else does. Many argue that same-sex couples should have the ability as to the same marriage benefits and public acknowledgment enjoyed by heterosexual couples and that banning gay marriage is unconstitutional discrimination. People opposing gay marriage say, “We must protect traditional marriage and the traditional family.” Matthew McTighe of the Mainers United for Marriage debates responds by saying, “Prote... ... middle of paper ... ...g and legalizing gay marriage.

This natural law is the prohibitionist view that heterosexuality is the normal, natural form of human sexuality and that all other deviance, inducing homosexuality, is not normal and not natural. Scripture, and this natural law philosophy, are some of the intellectual ammunition prohi­bitionists use. They want to stop tolerance of homosexuality at all costs. Urvashi Vaid, on the other hand, wants complete tolerance for homosexuals. She argues against these “evils” for equal rights for gays.