The world is gradually absorbed democratization, and laws are becoming more loyal, including homosexual aspects. Homosexuality has always existed, but it has never been so widespread and open as it is today. Nowadays, people can openly declare their sexual orientation, and, like everyone else, they want to live a full life - to have a spouse, to make wedding ceremonies, to give birth and adopt children. However, not all countries and states are providing the right of same-sex marriage. While Andrew Sullivan spoke about the equality of civil marriages, Lisa Miller reveals the problem of religious recognition of marriage, but both of them agreed that homosexual couples are more stable than straight unions.
According to Miller thought expressed in the "Our Mutual Joy: The Religious Case for Gay Marriage", one of the global aspects of the issue of gay marriage is religion because none of the official religions in the world recognizes homosexuality. The influence of religion on society is still very powerful. Most priests adhere Leviticus's expression "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination" (p30). Those who opposed the establishment of same-sex families, argue that marriage is always kind of a union between two people of different sexes, called bind father and mother to their children. If somebody tries to change it, marriage will cease to be marriage. The premise is correct, but the output looks completely wrong. Proponents of this view are wrong when they say that marriage performs only one task. In fact, there is a lot of functions. Definitely, marriage binds biological parents to their children, but allowing gay marriage, we do not change anything in this area. Not only the biological parents create ...
... middle of paper ...
...lizing such unions, we emphasize that marriage is something that should be pursued by all Americans without exception. Nor should we forget the fact that many same-sex couples are raising children.
"Everybody created equal" is the main idea occurring in both essays, whether it is occurring as Miller's religion aspect or Sullivan's civic procedure. Homosexuality is not a disease, not a pathology, but only one of the variants of interpersonal relations. Such families may well be complete and functional. Homosexuals may give the same good upbringing, education, and healthcare to their children, as well as others. The only thing that hinders the development of today gay marriage this very same society, contempt and protests which entail stereotypes and homophobia, and therefore does not allow you to create a healthy atmosphere for the development of future generations.
Gay marriage further damages the connection between marriage and parenthood by causing people to not consider marriagement just to be a parent. He later on argues that marriage has been a tradition since the beginning of time and everything supports it. “The family, led by a married mother and father, is the best available structure for both child rearing and cultural health. This is why, although some people will always pair off in unorthodox ways, society as a whole must never legitimize any form of marriage other than that of one man and one woman, united with the intention of permanency and the nurturing of children” (Colson
Lisa Miller uses the Bible as a basis for her argument for gay marriage in her essay "Our Mutual Joy: The Religious Case for Gay Marriage". She first begins her argument by saying that neither the Old Testament nor the New Testament show model examples for marriage. Therefore, neither a homosexual or heterosexual couple would want to look to the Bible for marriage advice. Instead, the Bible should be read for its universal truths. Miller goes onto say that there is no real definition of marriage in the Bible, and the laws and guidelines in the Bible were put in place for a culture that no longer exists. If Christians no longer subscribe to animal sacrifice, then why would they condemn homosexuality? She ends by discussing the fact that Jesus ' message was one of inclusion. So, all those who claim to follow the Bible 's teachings should love others regardless of their sexual orientation.
In his play “On Tidy Endings, a lover and ex-wife have gathered to sign documents and tie up loose ends after the death of a man. It was during the conception of this play that most Americans mandated being homosexual was a crime against god. These actions came because of a belief that god created man for woman, and woman for man. I believe Mr. Fierstein’s theme is to show people same sex marriage does not differ from any other, but it is the judgment by those who do not unde...
... It causes identity problems, confidence issues, and keeps people from experimenting with their true selves. Sullivan properly allows the reader to look at that point of view, and too understand walking in his shoes as a child. His explanation of self-difference explains why homosexuals contain themselves in order to live a normal lifestyles away from the negative views of our world. “It is not something genetically homosexual; it is something environmentally homosexual. And it begins young.” (Sullivan)
What is marriage? For thousands years, marriage has been a combination between a man and a woman. When they love each other, they decide to live together. That is marriage. But what will love happen between two same sex persons? Will they marry? Is their marriage acceptable? It is the argument between two authors: William J. Bennett and Andrew Sullivan. The two authors come from different countries and have different opinion about same sex marriage. Sullivan agrees with the gay marriage because of human right, on the other hand, Bennett contradicts his idea because he believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Even though their theories are totally different, their opinions are very well established.
... to agree on the fact that the issue at hand is one of religion. Religion seems to be the deciding factor right now when it comes to the question of what is right and what is wrong. Both authors see religion as the main concern when the question of homosexual marriage is brought up. So as each has very different ideals for society as a whole, both Bennett and Sullivan try to represent the happiness of the people as a whole, in their own ways. The two authors present very different points of view and each has well thought out reasoning behind what he has to say. Although the authors feel very different about how marriage should exist and how it should be regulated, there is some common ground between the authors.
Using multiple examples from his background provides us with a sense of understanding of the complications of both religious and government involvement in the decision to allow same-sex marriage. He demonstrates a solid awareness of who his target audience is and conveys his thoughts in a manner that is easily comprehended. The structure of his article flows nicely and the examples used prove to invite further thoughts on the subject. The highlight of Moody’s piece for me was this, “When our beloved Constitution was written, blacks, Native Americans and… women were quasi-human beings with no rights or privileges, but today they are recognized… with full citizenship rights. The definition of marriage has been changing over the centuries… it will change yet again as homosexuals are seen as ordinary human beings.”
Many people’s opinion on gay marriage is that same-sex marriage violates the “true” intentions of marriage, which “should” be between a man and a woman, but a more broad definition of marriage would be “(broadly) any of the diverse forms of interpersonal union established in various parts of the world to form a familial bond that is recognized legally, religiously, or socially, granting the participating partners mutual conjugal rights and responsibilities”
Bennett is a conservative republican who is a strong advocate for family values. The purpose of Bennett’s essay is to expose the downside of Andrew Sullivan’s argument in favor of same-sex marriage. He wants to persuade those who have read Sullivan’s essay to side with him. His audience seems to be primarily middle-aged heterosexuals who already take his stance on the topic.
Gay marriage is a hotly debated issue in today's society. Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett offer opposing views in the June 3, 1996 edition of Newsweek. Sullivan's article, “Let Gays Marry,” offers several arguments supporting the issues of same sex marriage. Bennett counters in his article, “Leave Marriage Alone,” that same sex marriages would be damaging to the sanctity of marriage. Each author presents several reasons for the positions they defend and bring up valid points to defend their opinions. William Bennett and Andrew Sullivan share a mutual respect for the values and sacredness of the bond of marriage. Their disagreements stem from who they believe should be allowed to marry.
A contradictory essay titled “Societal Suicide” by the authors Anne Morse and Charles Colson conveying that marriage ought to be realized as an old – fashioned and traditional way were people come together in holy matrimony when they said “traditional building block of human society.” Their essay continues to explicate the weary and unfair assumptions of marriage by concluding that there should only be the existence of man and woman relationships. The authors, due to gay couples overloaded with longing to marry one another, have also questioned marriage extinction. A question often asked is “How is it the end of marriage if same-sex couples marry?” Allowing gays to get married indorses marriage as well as supports the rights to care for every person. An...
In a country with it’s fundamentals based on liberty and equality, America has always struggled with those very concepts. Throughout history, Americans have been challenged to make decisions that have oppressed and freed certain groups of people. The political fight for same-sex marriages is a perfect example of this notion. This relation between spouses has created a major controversy that is creating history in our nation. A series of protests, acts and political scandal has finally opened America to discuss a topic that had been in “the closet” for a long time. This discussion asks questions that have caused a visceral reaction in society. Questions such as whether gays and lesbians should marry, and if so, should they be granted the same matrimony rights as heterosexual couples? Should marriage be protected to fit traditional American values? How would these unions affect or contribute to our definition of such a celebrated institution? .
Legal marriage is the right of all Americans regardless of their sexual orientation. Gay marriage is certainly a hot button issue. It invokes an emotional dialogue filled with passion, rage, hate and fear. However, at the base of it all, are two people who are in a committed relationship living normal and productive lives and contributing to society in a positive manner. This issue is being debated in every state of the union, and will eventually go to the Supreme Court.
... made groups of people have a very hostile attitude toward the subject matter. The traditional view of marriage is also important because it influences future generations and teaches children the meaning of the special union of a man and a woman. Many people also argue that when raising a child he or she should be raised by a father and a mother. Not both of the same sex. Although the debate of same-sex marriage may not affect some people, this is a hot topic that has changed the opinion of many people around the world. The topic of same-sex marriage is a subject that needs to be discusses by individuals who are certain of what they stand for and are capable of providing others with true and convincing arguments.
Marriage naturally creates families; it provides the conditions for a healthy environment that is beneficial to the upbringing of children. Opponents of same-sex marriage often ground their arguments on parental and religious concerns. Many argue that sa...