An argumentative essay is when a writer is trying to prove to the reader that an idea is as he sees it, backing it up with evidence. It must have two conflicting issues and so the reader takes on one side. This particular essay is a controversial issue that has been discussed far and wide. Gay marriages have elicited sharp views from people with some being for or against it. The writer in this essay will try to prove to the reader that gay marriages should be allowed citing examples to support that argument. This issue has been talked about bringing to the surface a lot of views, but all said and done, the truth remains that gay marriages are just like any other marriage and should be given a place in our society (Polikoff, p3).
Fist and foremost, some say that marriage was created by god and that is the reason why he put a man and woman on earth. This disposition is commonly heard yet it does not carry any water (Polikoff, p4). This has even been provided for in the federal laws but yet again its weakness can easily be seen. To begin with, marriage should not be defined. There should be nothing like who is supposed to get married and to whom (Polikoff, p5). This is should squarely be left in the hands of the interested parties whether a man and a woman or people of the same sex. The above argument is not enough to deny homosexuals a chance to enjoy what to them is good (Rauch, p25). If the society cannot come up with concrete evidence apart from this vague reason, then they should equally be denied an opportunity of condemning this marriage. If asked, and in the strict sense of the word, this is denial of human rights which is there in American laws.
Many people argue that marriage was instituted purely for procreation. They continue to say that this enables the married couple to start a family. If that is the case, married people who cannot give birth should not be allowed to say together to begin with (Rauch, p25). This is a bad image to the society and therefore these two should not have a place in the society yet no case that has ever been witnessed where the impotent couple has surrendered their marriage certificate simply because they cannot give birth (Mello, p 44). This would surely be fun to see. All said and done, this is still not an enough reason why homosexuals should not get married. They should be given an opportunity if the above is anything to go by.
Can't complete your paper?
Need a quick, creative solution?
Never too late to get it done by our prosWrite My Paper
Homosexuals cannot create a good environment within which kids would grow. This sounds not only interesting but also leaves a lot to be desired (Mello, p 45). Consider this, killers and people who have committed the worst crimes and even people well known to have abused the same children are allowed to get married and give birth (Mello, p 46). So the question here is, if this is what the society is giving priority, then why should such people get married? Truth here is, homosexuals have been seen raising kids very well once they adopt them from their biological ‘married’ parents (Mello, p 47). Studies carried out indicate that, those kids brought up by the homosexuals are equally better just like those from a straight marriage. Time and again no differences have been seen. From the experts, what brings diversity is the love being offered by the parents regardless of their sex. The writings are on the wall, homosexuals offer love to children just like or even more than their biological parents. They should be allowed to get married if the above argument is anything to go by.
Marriage is for ensuring human being species continues to exist
Those arguing like that cannot convince many why they think that by allowing gay marriages man is going to get extinct. Going by statistics and studies carried out, the population in the world is growing everyday (Mello, p 45). If this is to be analyzed in the critical sense, a gay marriage is one of the solutions to curb this. For any marriage to survive it calls for dedication and love and so lets not beat around the bush by not allowing gays to get married because they cannot give birth. They surely are bringing solution to one of the world’s menace and therefore they should get married (Rauch, p2).
Gay marriages, it has been observed, are a big threat to the marriage institution. Looking at this statement, one cannot help but see the contradiction in it (Rauch, p8). If gays are getting married, and the idea here is marriage, how again are they being a threat to the same? When the gay are allowed to get married, they will surely get partners whom they love and cherish (Rauch, p10). By doing this, these two will live happy as married couple unlike a man and a woman who will get married and then walk in the court the following day seeking divorce. This would then beat the ideal purpose of the above statement (Rauch, p12). If they are people who are a threat to marriage, it is the heterosexuals. Their marriages are not lasting even a single day. So all said and done, what the society should be contemplating, is to make hard for a married couple to easily get a divorce more than to think of how homosexuals should not be allowed to marry. They do not threaten marriage, if any case, they are putting to an end this menace.
The society, as said by many, should not discard heterosexual institutions at the expense of gay marriages. This is because; it is something which was there from time immemorial. This should be deemed as the least disposition ever (Rauch, p22). Giving an example with slavery, it was a nightmare that existed for quite sometime after which it was done away with when persons realized its evil deeds (Rauch, p25). It was not given a second thought even for a second. To begin with, nobody is advocating for straight marriages to be replaced with gay marriages. A man and woman can still marry and seek divorce if they so wish without being interfered with by gay marriages (Polikoff, p34). Something again worthy noting is that, in the traditional way, which is the bone of contention here, divorce was a thing of the past while today; this has been the talk of the day. Married couples are in and out of court seeking divorce (Polikoff, p38). The hypocritical nature of people trying to hide behind traditions yet what they are practicing is ruining what took so long to build is in it dangerous (Polikoff, p39). It would better people for people to admit that, indeed all is not well and the heterosexual marriages are threatening the tradition set up with the growing cases of divorce. The blame again should not be shifted on gay marriages as they are only meant to reduce these cases oh hypocrisy that has eaten people for long. If allowed, they will make sense of what is like to observe traditions.
Marriges of gay in Denmark
People of the same sex having sex are still not well understood giving a good reason to discard gay marriages. This again is not an excuse. Consider this, in Denmark gay marriages are fully recognized and enjoy full human rights just like any other marriage in that country (Polikoff, p44). In all towns of that country gay marriages are respected and they are in fact doing well than straight marriages. Back in 1990, a research conducted showed that, most of the church ministers at the timer did not support gay marriages (Polikoff, p54). However their warnings fell on deaf ears and the law to allow gay marriages was passed anyway. The most recent research in 1995 indicates that, most church ministers are reading from a different script (Synder, p 67). They are fully supporting the idea claiming that, the passed law comes with many advantages and has reduced cases of sexually transmitted diseases besides adultery and unfaithfulness in the gay marriages (Synder, p 68). Far from the notion that there exists no experiment to support gay marriages, the experiments in that country have been regarded by the priests as strengthening marriage organization. Going by all this, we should just assume that, the experiment was done in Denmark and worked miracles for them the same can work here and in any other place. In fact if church ministers supported the idea and other churches are still questioning this, we should assume that the church is equally confused more than the gays. Gays should just be let to be if the above is anything to go by.
Gay marriages would open a can of worms where other sexually unacceptable behaviors will get their way into the society such as incest among others (Synder, p 69). This argument is just meant to scare away people who will read or hear it. If this is the case, then why are countries like Denmark where this is openly done not in a mess? Scandinavian nations have practiced this for quite a long time yet there no reported cases of bestiality if any case, those nations have remained intact (Synder, p 70). This move is just meant to ensure that, gay marriages don’t even come into the picture to begin with. If this is the ideal motive, then why a convict who rape a young girl should be allowed to marry is still a question begging for an answer. Is this not encouraging sexual immoral behaviors? The bottom line is gay marriages are just okay and comes with so many advantages.
Position churches to gay marriages
Churches would be put in a tight corner if homosexual marriages are given a chance. This does not make any sense in whichever way you put it (Synder, p 77). The same church does not ordain other marriages such a marriage between two people who sought divorce in their previous institution (Larocque et al p 23). Again, the church should know that, the state allows churches to ordain marriage as a right otherwise it is not a requirement. So for a church to pretend that it will be compromised by ordaining a gay marriage would be hypocrisy of the highest degree (Larocque et al p 25).
Once gay marriages are allowed to take place, homosexuality cases will heighten in public learning institutions (Larocque et al p 27). If this is the case, can somebody please make the society see the sense how countries like Canada who embrace this idea have had their learning institutions affected? There isn’t simply because it is not even practical to begin with (Larocque et al p 28).
Homosexuality marriages would despise civilization from west. This in itself sounds absurd. As far as people know, homosexuality has been there since time immemorial just like any other western culture (Larocque et al p 30). To realize that it will threaten western civilization now is an understatement to say the least. It would be understandable if anyone would point out a specific incidence where gay marriage despised western culture (Larocque et al p 33).
Gay marriages should be given an opportunity in our society as it will stand to loose nothing anyway. If any case, it will be workable than many straight marriage that are in offing today. Finally, change is like rest; why not accept change by legalizing gay marriages.