We Homos Deserve To Marry

Upon deep study on the ethics of marriage, I've come to some conclusions about the argument against gay marriage that I believe are baseless and self-contradictory. On a philosophical level, I would like to share them with you...

1) Marriage has always been between a man and a woman, why should we need to change our position now?

Our society has many traditions, from holidays to ways of life, which have changed vastly over the years. Consider, for instance, black rights. Fifty years ago, we were living in a segregated nation (mostly) who professed that allowing blacks the same rights would hurt the fabric of society and that they weren't equal. The arguments were mostly fear-based and religious in nature, but begged an important question - would allowing blacks the same rights actually hurt society? Would changing our traditional view of blacks do more harm than good? Well, of course it wouldn't which is why the views were changed. This is not to say that unequal treatment of blacks has been eradicated. On many levels, it still exists. However, legislation was dismantled that were segratist in nature and blacks were legally given the same rights as evey other U.S. citizen. The fact that marriage has always been between a man and a woman does not mean that is how it was initially defined. Marriage was assumed to be heterosexual in nature, but it was never founded that way. In fact, marriage was defined as two individuals who want to publically express their love for one another and live monogamously until death do they part. On this basis, there is no need to change the definition of marriage, because it was never defined in the first place. Why now, hundreds of years later, does it need to be defined? I'll tell you why... fear. People are really afraid that having homosexual marriage will hurt society. Let's look at Europe, for a moment. Many of the nations in Europe recognize gay marriages and allow them the same legal benefits as heterosexual marriages. If this "hurting society thing" were true, we would have clear and definate evidence based on their system of acceptance. Their society would already be crumbling (for years now), but it's not. In fact, because of the inclusion of gay marriages in Europe, their society has remain unaffected by the negative aspects described by gay marriage opponents. This, they cannot deny. More of this in my next point...

2) The homosexual lifestyle is a poor environment for children and the family in general.

When measure 36 was being presented, the "yes" side told of conclusive scientific research done that shows children reared in homosexual relationships as worse-off than other children reared in heterosexual relationships. However, these sources were never cited (I still can't find them on the website) and there is actually MUCH MORE scientific evidence to the contrary. Because it takes a lot more effort and planning on the part of gay couples to have children, these children will be loved and wanted to the infinate degree. Because of this, the children are generally better-educated, more well-adjusted and have an affinity for all cultures and lifestyles, something not as vastly found in heterosexual parenting. From personal experience, all three of us were planned and equally cared for, thankfully. However, think of the number of babies born that aren't planned, aren't wanted, and ultimately, will not reach their full potential because of this. The only stigma around the negative aspect regarding child-rearing comes from those who don't "like" the idea. Well, I don't "like" horseradish, but that doesn't prevent me from thinking less of those who do. Which brings me to this point...

3) The homosexual lifestyle is unnatural and perverted and as such, does not deserve the natural rights associated with heterosexuals.

If you actually believe this, you haven't taken any animal behavior classes. From the smallest insects to the highest order of mammals, homosexual relations can be found in each and every species. It's not just for mating, either; Animals that couple for life ALSO show long-lasting homosexual relations. To say that homosexual activity is unnatural is to deny nature itself. To put it bluntly, the people that believe this are uneducated and need to read an animal behavior book. That being said, homosexuality IS natural. The only reason something is perverted is because it is unnatural. Sex with animals, sex with children, THESE are unnatural and perverted. Therefore, homosexual relations are not perverted because they're as natural as any other relationship. The problem here is that people don't LIKE it. To bring up my previous paragraph, the fact that people don't like something does not mean there should be laws banning its rights. It is unethical to deny rights to those based on one's personal preference. I don't like sex with women, so does that mean I have a right to make laws against heterosexual sex? That would be consistent with the argument, but I like women and their rights, so therefore they should have them. All of my friends can attest to this... they aren't gay (95% anyway) and yet after knowing me, they cannot see any reason why I am less than human or my actions are unnatural.

4) Homosexuals don't value lasting relationships.

While it is true that some homosexual men and women have a need for sex more than a need for committment, could you remind me what the divorce rate is in this country? Oh yeah, REALLY REALLY REALLY HIGH. Especially for kids my age (on average), committment is very rarely the priority. Robin and I are somewhat of an anomoly in the grand scale of 20 somethings. My love for him is real, our relationship is real, so I cannot conclude that it won't last. We have gay friends who have been partnered for 7 or more years. I know of couples who have been together for 50 or more years.



I appreciate the most those who are willing to set aside what their gut tells them of their preferences and listen to what is best for humanity. There is no conclusive evidence that two heterosexuals who love each other can harm society anymore than two homosexuals. In fact, if you look at domestic abuse, which occurs in a frightening percentage of heterosexual relationships, you can conclude that too many people are in marriages for the wrong reasons. When two people actualy love each other, the only negative thing that can come out of their union is formica countertops and tacky furniture. For everything else, from their impact on those around them to their place in society, this has a positive effect. All this being as it is, denying the same rights to homosexuals as heterosexuals is denying who they are and separating them from that society.