Ethical Issues Surrounding Gay Marriage Essay
Ethical Issues Surrounding Gay Marriage
When I think of Ethical issues in the world today, Gay Marriage seems to hits me the hardest. Now Maybe it is the fact that I am bisexual myself or that I have a homosexual uncle who has been married for 2 years. Either way, I am a strong supporter of the entire marriage institution, especially gay marriage. In this paper I will first indentify the ethical issue of gay marriage and specifically explore the ethical problems gay marriage presents including their pros and cons. I will then explain the classical theory of and determine how it would resolve the problems at hand.
Next I will continue by contrasting the theoretical solution with perspective of towards gay marriage. Lastly, I will go over which view is the closest to my own personal outlook of gay marriage. Let’s begin with the ethical issue at hand, Gay Marriage. The right for homosexual couples to become married is frowned upon in most of the world. In fact, Gay Marriage is and has been one of the greatest ethical issues in the United States since Slavery and Women Rights. In my own personal opinion, I believe Same-sex Marriage should not be an ethical issue.
What is unethical, is how A person may lie, cheat, or fornicate, and still experience the grace of God; but if they are in a gay relationship they are somehow socially damned. I believe by denying any one person their constitution rights to equality is wrong. If a person is homosexual and they choose to marry their significant other, they have the civil right to do so under the constitution as a U. S. citizen. By denying any one person the right to marry whomever they choose, that is a violation of said persons civil rights, because marriage holds legal civil status.
We all are Americans who have the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. How can anyone deny Americans this right primarily because of their sexual orientation? People pride themselves on being law abiding citizens, but choose to discriminate against homosexual person’s lifestyle and love interest based on the so called facts written many years ago in a “religious” book. The Bible is not the law! That is one thing that most religious groups have not yet grasped. No matter what any one person’s religious beliefs are, there is no law,
power, or authority that gives them the right to push their religious beliefs onto another’s life. I do not nor have I ever thought religion should ever be the deciding factor in the worlds verdict about gay marriage? Today the growing acceptance of homosexuality is a direct threat to the domination of traditional Christian norms. According to the Christian Bible and many other religions texts, there is the believe that marriage is meant solely between a man and women, anything else is considered a act of sin.
However, due to the bible stating that one should not pass judgment on another, many churches are more recently accepting same-sex couples. Personally speaking, many religious “church goers” use the bible as a means to attack others. They walk around presenting this holier than thou appearance, but neglect to follow all of the teachings their bible possesses. It is funny how those same religious groups that try to argue that gay marriage is a sin are the same people that are protesting to band their children’s public schools of religious content and practices.
The separation of Church and State has been put into place in many U. S. cities. Knowing this, I do not understand how any government is to follow the rules on the separation of church and state, but then be given the right to place laws against gay marriage solely based of the Bibles written word. Homosexuals do not spend time going around telling heterosexual people that they are not allowed to engage in intercourse until marriage, while that’s in the bible. The Bible vs. The Constitution seems to play the biggest role in the argument against gay marriage.
People have stated, “the constitution should be changed, its outdated. ” However, their entire argument is incorporating the first amendment right of freedom of speech. before the constitution was written, going against the government was unlawful. No one was allowed to speak their minds. I know that even in the bible when one went against what god said they were punished or put to death. Heterosexuals don’t like certain rights in the constitution that go against their own personal beliefs, but will turn and cater to others, like freedom of speech.
Without some of those rights it would be unlawful for me to write this paper. Plus, I would have been murdered some time ago for being a white and black, bisexual man. what most fail to realize is that yes the bible thought of gays as a sin but it also listed a number of other acts as sin. If our lives were truly run solely by the Bible’s scriptures, Gay marriage would be the last of the heterosexuals problems. Especially when most of the worlds murders are committed by heterosexuals. I personally do not like to base my arguments off a source unless I plan to use the entire source as foundation.
I cannot say the constitution is wrong solely off on right I do not agree with. But turn around and accept the others that cater to my better living. That would label me as a hypocrite. Just like how many people use their religious beliefs to fight gay rights, but fail to follow other aspects of the bibles teachings. I am just human, who am I to judge anyone. This is just one of the many reasons why I can argue that many of the firm believers against gay marriage are set in hypocritical views. People against gay marriage claim that marriage is dedicated to starting a family.
They argue that with marriage you have children and build a happy home. However, for many people, marriage is more about love and mutual trust than about starting a family, and so they would say that gay marriage is not an issue. So for those who say it’s only to start a family, I would call this a delusional fantasy. For one there are more broken homes in the world now than anything. Now yes, Homosexual couples cannot physically reproduce on their own. However, this does not give reasonability to deny the couple the right to marry. There are heterosexual couples that cannot physically have children of their own as well.
There are many women out in the world that cannot bear children due to a numerous amount of health issues. My own aunt Kelly was told that she can never have children of her own. Her body just doesn’t have the strength and or properly functioning organs to create life. The same goes for many men. I have a neighbor that recently told me that he has a condition that denies him the ability to produce reproductive sperm. As he likes to say, “he is shooting blanks. ” Knowing this I didn’t see any government laws stopping them from getting married. My aunt was told about her inabilities to birth, over 20 years ago.
Today she has been married twice. May I remind you that she is a heterosexual woman that cannot have children of her own and is still legally allowed to marry. In today’s world, there are many alternative options for couples to start a family. The most popular way is adoption. Also, there is much more controversy no-a-days regarding adoption . It has become apparent that more and more Homosexual couples are going outside of the United States to adopt children. They are forced to go outside of the United states due to the fact that they are not legally allowed to adopt here in the states.
Lesbian and gay-parented families may be more likely than others to include members from more than one ethnic group . So because the government wants to discriminate against the homosexual lifestyles, there are more and more American children left without a home. No one that can legally adopt them is stepping up for the responsibility. It is true that you truly respect something more that you have to fight for. My grandmother used to tell me this since I was really young. There are so many heterosexuals out there that are “horrible parents” or that take the gift of parenting for granted.
They do drugs and make extreme decisions that break up their families or make the decision to rid themselves of the responsibility of parenting all together. I speak from person experience. As a young boy at the age of 5, my mother gave me and my 5 younger siblings up to child protective services. At the time she chose her friends and her drug abuse over her children and family. She did not care whether we would be okay or not, she dropped me off with only 1 shoe. All my mother cared about was being able to get high without the guilt of us seeing her do it.
I ended up back in the family, but my siblings were all separated some are still in the system. Now I personally have never seen a homosexual couple that are bad parents. It is usually the exact opposite. Homosexual couples have to fight in order to build their families so they try not to do anything to mess that chance up. I have also never met a homosexual couple that didn’t want children. Along with starting families, those against gay marriage also argue that children brought up in a same-sex marriage household are taught morals and beliefs.
Some say that this type of household is poisonous to the child, that it teaches them to go against “our creator”. what if their families do not share in the same religious beliefs as others. Contrary to what most assume, there are many people that do not believe in God. Just like there are many cultures that believe in gay rights. So no one can make the basis of their argument on “the creator” when not everyone believes in him. Also, they like to say that by growing up in a gay household, the child is going to turn gay. the association between religious attendance and attitudes
toward gay marriage is mediated by a belief that sexual orientation is a choice rather than innate & . This is so ridiculous in so many ways. For one being gay is not a disease, you can’t just catch it. Being gay is not something you inhabit like a accent. People are not made gay they are born gay; its just a matter of when they decide to accept it. I was raised in a house with a male and female parenting role, and I still knew I was different. I am a bisexual male and so are many of my friends. These friends of mine were raised in all types of different households, but known were raised in same-sex households.
At the same time I have 3 friends that were adopted and raised by two homosexual men and not a single one of them are gay. They are all in heterosexual relationships and never once thought of being with the same-sex. These are a few examples of discrimination against gay marriage. Another major problem with gay marriage that people are beginning to argue is the affect of heterosexual couples. Many people argue that the world will change for heterosexual couples if same-sex marriages were allowed. Income taxes is one on the many reasons they have behind this outrages claim.
Many people are in the belief that income taxes will be increased. Also, the IRS gives certain credits and benefits to those individuals that have children and other dependants. Heterosexuals believe that the government will be forced to apply the same financial benefits and credits on income taxes towards homosexual couples which they believe will lower everyone’s benefits. Along with their income taxes, they’re under the assumption that social security taxes will increased and the benefits decrease if the government has to provide accommodation for these same-sex married couples.
One of the more common ignorant claims is regarding heath care. People are arguing that their medical insurance premiums will rise based on these stereotypical images of homosexual lifestyles. They have always believed that homosexuals get diseases and illnesses like Aids or HIV easier than heterosexuals. Based on this belief they think that there will be a higher health care needs associated to the treatment of these more at risk diseases. These potential changes in circumstances do not hold enough credibility to deny a person the right to join the institution of marriage.
It is unethical to claim the power to control if someone can get married. Most of the world believes Gay marriage is unethical. I have to disagree with that assumption. This is another way that heterosexuals choose to be hypocrites. Using Arranged marriage as an example, I prove my case. Mostly everyone in the world, whether homosexual or heterosexual, can agree that arranged marriage is unethical. Many people believe that all want arranged marriage is wrong because you should have the right to choose whom you marry. So how is that any different than what homosexuals want.
Homosexuals are also being denied the chance to marry who they choose. Again being hypocritical! People believe Marriage is about love and commitment. Both homosexuals and those forced into arranged marriages are victims. Neither gets to decide what they want to do, how to live, who to love. The only difference between the two is that at least arranged marriage is marriage. The couple that is actually in love cannot be married. When two people fall in love, they all want the same thing. They dream of this life together, married, with a family, and more. Why should homosexuals be revoked that reality.
It should not matter if you are gay or straight, you should be able to get married if you want. On another note I also, do not believe that anyone should have to travel away from home to legally get married. Some people have to travel multiple states away, because none of the states near them allow same-sex marriage. The day that all 50 states come to the same decision accepting gay marriage will not come anytime soon, but I do hope I am still alive to see a good size amount of them jump the bandwagon. This is one way that would begin to solve the issue.
When it comes to gay marriage, I believe the classical theory of Utilitarianism would help solve many of the problems. Utilitarianism is a consequential theory. It is the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good . The Utilitarian view seeks to maximize the overall good in a situation. In other words, one should always act in a way that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It is proven that there are fewer people against same-sex marriage, than for it. So the theory of Utilitarianism is the best resolution to the issue the ethical problems of gay marriage.
If the government acted with utilitarian views, then we would have less anger, debate, spend less money on a unnecessary battle. Along with this view one would also need a clear perspective of the issue. A clear perspective of the issue of same-sex marriage would be relativism. Relativism is the idea that one’s beliefs and values are understood in terms of one’s society, culture, or even one’s own individual values . It is the philosophical concept that all points of view are equally valid, and that all truth is relative to the individual .
Both sides that are involved realize that neither side will ever agree nor neither side is right or wrong. Each Society, culture or religious group is formed by its own ethical values and beliefs, with how they see things to be right and wrong. I believe that when it comes to gay marriage everyone is going to have to agree to disagree. Religion is the top reason to why people are against same-sex marriage. What church goers fail to realize is that they are forcing their religious beliefs onto not only the homosexuals but to all.
Everyone has their own views and when Homosexuals try to voice theirs, they are attacked, (metaphorically). The only way that this problem is ever going to get anywhere is if both sides try to understand that just because everyone doesn’t share your same views and beliefs, that doesn’t make them wrong. The cannot ignorantly believe that everyone automatically shares their beliefs. Homosexuals are already at this point, they are the hypocrites in this situation. All they want is equality, the same equality that everyone else has been fighting for all these years.
In conclusion, I have indentified the ethical issue of gay marriage and explored the ethical problems gay marriage presents including the pros and cons. I then explained how the classical theory of Utilitarianism would resolve those problems. I continued by contrasting the theoretical solution with perspective of relativism towards gay marriage. Lastly, I went over which view is the closest to my own personal outlook of gay marriage. I do not believe that there should even be such a thing as “gay marriage”. The title itself is discriminatory.
Gay people do not go around referring to a heterosexual couple’s marriage as straight marriage. So why should a society filled with diverse lifestyles be allowed to refer to homosexual marriages as “gay marriage”. Marriage is marriage, either way. It should not be labeled as any other. Whether, heterosexual or Homosexual, it’s the same institution and should hold the same rights. At the end of the day I am a firm believer that the discrimination against gay marriage should be outlawed. Gay people do value the institution of marriage, therefore their relationship and want to marry is ethical in my eyes.
References Driver, J. (2009, June 21). The History of Utilitarianism. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato. stanford. edu/archives/sum2009/entries/utilitarianism-history/ Haider-Markel, D. P. (2008). Beliefs about the origins of homosexuality and support for gay rights. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, pp. 291–310. doi:10. 1093/poq/nfn015 Mosser, K. (2010). Introduction to Ethics and Social Responsibility. San Diego: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Patterson, C. J. (2013). Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents: Psychology, Law, and Policy.
Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1(S), 27–34. Rosenfeld, M. J. (2007). The age of independence: Interracial Unions, Same-sex Unions, and the Changing American Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Swoyer, C. (2010, December 21). Relativism. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/relativism/ Todd, N. R. , & Ong, K. S. (2012). Political and Theological Orientation as Moderators for the Association Between Religious Attendance and Attitudes Toward Gay Marriage for White Christians. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 4(1), 56–70.