Another paper written for my “Marriage & Intimacy” class this one deals with the subject of same-sex marriages and the varying impacts that could occur in today’s “classic” family structure if they were permitted. The assingment was to read both sides of this argument out of our text and then summarize each, make a case for each, and lastly present our view and support why this is what we believe.
Same-sex marriages are probably one of the most controversial issues of the times and will most likely remain this way for some time to come. However as with any controversies there are strong proponents to each side of the issue and in this particular case I am referring to Andrew Sullivan and James Q. Wilson. Andrew Sullivan is for same-sex marriages and supports his ideals through the belief that the legalization of same sex marriages will overall improve the lives of homosexuals and even how they are viewed by society. On the other hand James Q. Wilson is clearly opposed to the idea of legalizing same-sex marriages supporting his claims through ideals of religious and natural laws, and the negative implications that legalization “could” have on society.
Andrew Sullivan believes that there is really no just reason why same-sex marriages should not be legalized. He proposes that this legalization would “basically” remedy the overall negative view that the general population has toward homosexuals. In fact he seems to believe that legalization would be such a remedy for society that he even stresses how both liberal and conservative parties should be in favor of the idea. His theory on liberals is that simply because marriage is a public institution and that since the focus of this institution is an emotional, financial, and psychological bond between two people, it should be available to anyone. As for the conservative theory, Sullivan centers on being opponents of co-habitation and thus should support the traditional idea of marriage as the final step in two people expressing their everlasting love for one another. Perhaps the best summary of the overall ideals expressed by Andrew Sullivan is one of his own statements that “So long as intelligent people understand that homosexuals are emotionally and sexually attracted to the same sex as heterosexuals are to the other sex, then there is no human reason on earth why it should be granted to one group and not the other.”
The Term Paper on Gay Marriage Sex One Union
... the legalization of same-sex marriages will only further the deterioration of marriage as an institution ('Should Gay Marriage be ... being discriminated against? Another pro for same-sex marriages-it 'supports stability.' It stabilizes by allowing gays ... Sullivan, Andrew. 'State of the Union.' New Republic. May 2000: 18. Online EBSCO Host. Galileo. 11/28/00. Tharp, Michael. 'A 'No' to Gay Marriage.' ...
James Q. Wilson writes about three distinct reasons why the legalization of same-sex marriages is religiously/morally, naturally wrong, as well as simply wrong for our society. The excerpt from the book of Leviticus without a doubt makes it clear that homosexuality is an “abomination” of what God has created. Wilson then proceeds to use the ideals behind natural law that were set forth by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. Natural law basically concludes that the supreme importance lie on the aspect of marriage in addition to the baring of children through marriage for whom both the parent of the child and mankind itself will care for and nurture. As a final reason against the legalization of same-sex marriages Wilson turns to the society of today and gives arguments in regard to the opposition of the issue. Arguments include asking the question “Why an alternative to marriage should be invented and praised when we’re having enough trouble maintaining the institution at all?” Wilson believes that if an alternative was created it would act as a “mere parody” to the present institution of marriage.
The Term Paper on Impact of Gay Marriage on Children
Take a look at the picture of a gay and a lesbian couple (see Figure 1). Long ago people would have raised their eyebrows and glared at such obvious display of affection between two men and two women. They would have scurried away and cursed them who engaged in activities that compromise morality. They would have felt anger to know that a man would even think of marrying another man or a woman to ...
The raising of children is also touched heavily upon because first of all homosexual couples can’t biologically have children with one another, and thus poses another question of fairness for a child being raised in a family that at the moment is considered in our society to be incredibly taboo. Finally Wilson concludes with a look at just what the institution of marriage means to both heterosexuals and homosexuals. He points out that his opponent Andrew Sullivan states himself that the contract of marriage between homosexual couples is understood to have a need for “extramarital outlets.” Due to the fact that these “extramarital outlets” don’t exist in the understanding of heterosexual marriage and to suggest that they might in homosexual marriage is without question defining two different types of marital bonds. Though this was not the understanding that Andrew Sullivan set out to accomplish for same-sex marriages it seems that James Q. Wilson has caught Sullivan turning basically supporting what he set out to oppose; the idea of a separate institution of commitment for same-sex couples.
Overall the issue of whether or not same-sex marriages should be legalized is a tough one for me to express a true and honest opinion about. First of all it is not an issue that I am particularly interested in and thus I have not spent very much time researching making a just opinion unattainable. Though I know many homosexuals all with good hearts and consider every one of them to be my friends, my religious beliefs as a Christian give me a sense of sadness and fear for these people as well. I believe in a nation founded under a fair and just God and fear that without ultimate repentance when the Day of Judgment comes as Leviticus states, “their blood shall be upon them.” This is the double standard that I am forced through faith to live by at least until I am welcomed into the kingdom of heaven and can be privilege to the ultimate truths of life and of mankind’s future.
The Term Paper on Gay Rights Marriage Homosexuals Proposition
Why is Proposition 22: Limit On Marriages, an important matter in the state of California The reason is because it affects millions of people being heterosexual or homosexual. According to the article, A Discussion about Differences: The Left Hand Analogy, Warren J. Blumenfeld and Diane Raymond states that there are approximately 25 million left-handed people in the United States with the ...
