Widening the Aisle: Extending Marital Rights to Homosexuals
Known to some people as a lifetime commitment of devotion, to others a promise to reside with a stranger, and even to some people as a union arranged by their parents, marriage is a widely varying ritual practiced all over the world. In the United States, marriage is a freedom of choice and an act of love, supported with benefits and privileges from the government. It has traditionally been the union of a woman and a man, made with the expectation of permanence and the aim of producing and raising offspring. Tradition, however, is beginning to change. The divorce rate is growing, there is an increase of step-families and single-parent families, and more and more couples are opting not to have children. Along with the rise of women in the work force, the traditional view of marriage is broadening.In 1967, the United States Supreme Court decided that state bans on interracial marriage were unconstitutional. America decided to leave the choice of a marital partner to the individual, despite the objections from those who believed racial mixing was morally and religiously wrong. Once again our society is faced with the question of leaving the choice of a spouse to the individual. As did the interracial couples of the sixties, the g
Easing the ban on same-sex marriage would be a conservative movement towards promoting traditional, lasting marriages, and also could be looked at as a logical health policy in this age of AIDS. What a double-standard it is that society believes in long-lasting, stable commitments, and expects them from both hetero- and homosexual couples, yet does not provide the option of a legal institution of this commitment to homosexuals! Marriage is a sacred union which promotes healthy, socially beneficial values for America's citizens. The legalization of same-sex marriage would neither undermine its sacredness nor cause the destruction of the institution. In his essay, "Homosexual Partners are Undermining the Family," Bradley Hayton concludes his argument by saying, '. . .children should be encouraged to live in mutual monogamy with one sexual partner in marriage.' Well, Mr. Hayton, that is exactly what the legalization of same-sex marriage would promote. Opponents of gay marriage claim that homosexual parenting harms children, but the suitability of homosexual parents is a separate issue than marriage. If gay marriages were approved, adoption agencies would continue to investigate the couple requesting adoption, as they have always done. While not much research is available at the present time on the effects of homosexual parenting, none of the thirty-five studies that have been conducted have found that it has any adverse effect on children. The studies show that the younger children are, the more open-minded and accepting they are of their parents' lifestyles, and that the children of gay parents rarely suffer from any social stigma. The issue of adoption is one that should be investigated further, but marriage must come first. Just like any other human, homosexuals are capable of being loving, effective parents, and by allowing them to be married, society would be only promoting their stability and permanence.
Some topics in this essay:
Marriage Legal31,
Brent Hartinger,
Marriage Legal,
David Mixner,
,
Supreme Court,
Youth Suicide,
Hartinger Unlike,
Walter Williams,
Bradley Hayton,
same-sex marriage,
domestic partnership,
gay marriage,
homosexual couples,
laws written preserve,
laws written,
bereavement leave,
legalization same-sex,
homosexual parenting,
homosexuals marriage,
belief homosexuality,
america's laws written,
legalization same-sex marriage,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 1342
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
Example Essays Home
