The debate concerning Same Sex Marriages (SSMs) has become a controversial issue in the contemporary US society. In the recent past, we have witnessed a lot of debate either in favor, or against the sanction of the same sex marriages by the federal government. This essay explores the underlying assumptions that individuals have against the proposal of legalizing SSMs.
Proponents supporting the legalization of gay unions argue that marriage is based on love, relationships, and tolerance which supersede any other issue. However, this essay argues that things are not easy as they seem. There are a lot of aspects that militate against the acknowledgement of same sex marriages.
This essay argues that same sex marriages have the capacity to cause detrimental problems. This is in relation to a variety of significant social and cultural factors that disqualify such kinds of unions (“Disadvantages of Gay and Lesbian Marriage (Same-sex Marriage)” par. 1).
Several surveys conducted in the 1990s have suggested that the biggest issue affecting conservative Christians and any other American citizen from the North is the possibility of awarding the same privileges to SSMs, which are enjoyed by heterosexual couples.
The issue which raises the highest contention is the legalization of SSMs. From the initial attempt which was instituted to legalize gay marriages in Hawaii, the issue has remained in the public focus. Tensions have escalated during 2003 when gay marriages were accepted in Ontario and British Columbia. However, the conservative Christian clergy have defined SSMs as a potential hazard to society.
They regard the derogative nature of this vice as self-explanatory, and hence they do not indulge in in-depth discussions of the factors that arouse their concerns (Disadvantages of Gay and Lesbian Marriage (Same-sex Marriage)” par. 2).
The government of Hawaii and the petitioners who filed the case on behalf of the Christian clergy argued that SSM couples cannot offer the same parenting quality as heterosexual parents. They emphasize that the only way to ensure that children are provided with quality care is to demand both parents to be of separate genders.
Additionally, it is argued that children raised by SSMs are confused in relation to the particular gender roles they are supposed to take in society. This is because scientifically, pro-creation is a preserve of a man and woman. These children are left to figure out their gender roles from the community.
It is difficult to educate these children on the significance of traditions amidst the confusion. All through the centuries male and female unions have raised children, guided, and taught them the traditions of society (Newton 215).
The move to legalize gay marriages will break traditional family norms which are significant to the society. The foundation pillar of the human society and the bond which holds it together is the conventional family comprised of two heterosexual parents and children. These conventional families have sustained the US society through the great depression, and many other adversities over the years.
Scholars argue that even if an individual is deserted by a friend or lover, the family will always remain supportive. The cause attributed to the erosion of culture and societal norms is the dysfunctional family structure. The introduction of a different kind of family would only exacerbate the situation (“Should Same-Sex Marriages be Legalized?” par. 13).
The legalization of gay marriages could set a new precedence in legal issues. For example, it could pave the way for multiple marriages or unions which involve animals. Activists in favor of SSMs argue that these unions should be legalized because they do not cause any injury. However, this could initiate a chain reaction that can erode the values of the marriage institution.
For instance, if individuals wish to marry their pet dogs, why should they be obstructed? What if an individual wants to marry their siblings or parents, how will it be prevented? Unless a conclusive description of marriage is agreed upon, individuals will take advantage of the vague laws. It only takes a single wrong decision by the US Supreme Court to pave the way for this sort of anarchy in the marriage institution.
The legalization of SSMs would be an imposition of a retrogressive law to a majority of the population who are against gay marriages. For instance, judges in California ruled that the pledge of allegiance was against human freedoms. It should also be noted that 95% of Americans were against this ruling, but it did not stop the courts from upholding the decision (“Should Same-Sex Marriages be Legalized?” par. 14).
Gay lifestyles are immoral and should not be promoted because evidence from research indicates that it is associated with reduced life expectancy, psychological illnesses, among other complications.
Recent surveys have revealed that individuals in SSMs, based on a multiplicity of reasons, are expected to live for only 20 years. Like other social vices such as smoking and alcoholism, same sex marriages should be vehemently opposed. Any attempt to legalize them would break the social fabric of society.
Works Cited
Disadvantages of Gay and Lesbian Marriage (Same-sex Marriage). 2011. Web.
Newton, David E. Same-sex Marriage: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2010. Print.
Should Same-Sex Marriages be Legalized?. n.d. Web.