Homosexuals should be allowed to marry

Homosexuals refer to the group of people that has a preference for attachment and sexual activities with persons of the same sex. Most people experience homosexual curiosity at one point in their lives and hence this idea forms a basic part of human sexuality (Baunach 346). Many homosexuals prefer to be called gay or lesbians as in the case of women due to their exclusive sexual meaning of homosexuality. In modern society, people look to another to tell them what to think, what to do and even who to love. The idea that homosexuality is a sin has made most homosexuals live very unfair lives where they keep their sexuality a secret to friends, family, and society. In recent years, however many countries in the world are encouraging the homosexuals to come out of the closets and explore their sexuality. Most societies have started embracing this idea and have realized there is nothing to be ashamed of about having an affiliation for the same-sex partner. Although communities and countries still hold on to their idea that this marriage setting is a taboo and degradation of societal cultural morals and norms some countries have legalized the marriage between same-sex partners (Clement 526). To begin with, the whole of America has legalized homosexual marriages and Canada came up with legislation that forbids discrimination on grounds of sexual preference. Most religions all over the world still hold on to the idea that homosexuality is an intolerable sin which should not be incorporated into the beliefs of a community.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Many religions argue that according to scriptures, God Himself made it clear when he created Adam and Eve, He created both male and female and put them together in the Garden of Eden, so the idea of homosexuality is not just a mortal sin but also a violation of Gods liking. Homosexuality has not only been recently invented, but there has also been a group of men who were attracted to their fellow men or experimenting along those lines of sexuality. According to statistics, only a small minority group is affected by this idea (Clement 529-531). However, according to the latest research findings, these figures will never be accurate since some people are not sure of their own sexuality and those who do are not ready to open up to the researchers. Homosexuality should not be taken as an abnormality, illness or sexual perversion; it is in itself a natural phenomenon. Although the idea of families in society is to act as building blocks through reproduction, homosexuality is a human idiosyncrasy that will always exist in society regardless of the ideas people hold about it.

According to Whitehead (63-65), the idea as to why a man should be attracted to another man is still unclear although the gays argue that their prevalence of men to women is genetic and in more open phenomenon among some animals too. However, many questions as to why some gays have only been seen to open up to this idea later in life are still unknown, on the other hand, it also brings the question of how stable this form of sexuality really is. This idea of homosexuality has remained a controversy in the society and has attracted a lot of publicity as to whether the victims should be allowed to explore their sexuality without having to hide due to the criticism from the society and religion. The main objective of this paper is to discuss whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry (Whitehead 67-70).

According to a survey carried out in 1988, the number of individuals opposing gay marriage was 71%, however, this number had dropped to 52% by the year 2006.This figure has continued to decrease for individuals with less or no religious affiliations and for individuals living the urban lifestyle. Religion has contributed very much in the discrimination of the gay community. People who have no religious affiliations, therefore, have a better opinion towards the gay community since they are not being pushed by their religious affiliations. The high percentage in 1988 was due to the strong opposition from African Americans, older Americans, southerners, republican as well as the evangelical Protestants.

Liberalization of the idea of marriage between the homosexuals has brought about the drastic change in the societal attitude toward this idea. According to Baunach (347), this change represents a cultural shift. On the other hand, the use of equality and tolerance by the homosexuals in the community events as well as societal moments might have played a great part too in convincing the parties against it to embrace this idea and stop discriminating the sexual affiliations of the gay community. One of the gay activists argued that it the right of every citizen to acquire equal treatment regardless of their race, gender or sexual orientation. For this reason, the government should have an obligation to the gay community in recognizing their civil union as members of the state and legal citizens Baunach (349-353). To begin with, an upstanding citizen who abides by the laws of the state, pays tax and serves the community should be legally able to afford the rights of a citizen and like any other citizen in a country, this has not been seen to happen since the government, citizens and religion is seen to discriminate certain people.

Gays are lawful citizens who pay taxes, obey the laws of the land, contribute to the community welfare and should, therefore, be granted equal rights as any other legal citizen. No individual should be discriminated on the grounds of their sexual orientation, race, religion, or gender. Secondly, since the heterosexual couples are granted the right to enjoy their sexual affiliations, the gays too should not be overlooked. The most outstanding discriminating factor has been observed in the issue of social benefits. When a gay partner dies the surviving party is not allowed to claim the social benefits of the deceased. The gay community is a part of the working generation; nevertheless, they also contribute towards the social benefit thus giving them a solid reason as to why they should not be denied these benefits.

The saddening thing about this situation is that heterosexuals have access to the social benefits of their deceased partner hence this makes it very unfair for the gay and lesbians who are left with very unstable retirements due to lack of laws to define their rights. According to Yang (pg. 477-479), a heterosexual who is even divorced can claim the social benefits of their partner whereas a lifelong partner from the homosexual community cannot claim benefits of a deceased partner. The people who suffer most in this situations the children from the gay relationships since if they were not legally adopted by the deceased party they are denied the right to claim the social benefits of their deceased parent. Someone may wonder how all this is relevant to gay marriages but the outstanding factor here is those same-sex partners don't have good provisions for adopting children to start a family and on the other hand they are discriminated for their unmarried state (Yang 479-485).Human rights campaign is working towards inclusion of the gays, lesbians and the transgender to be included in the survivors benefits of their partners married or divorced just like the heterosexual couples. This campaign, however, has not been taken into consideration by the legislature .the failure of the government to recognize these marriages between gays lesbian and transgender has denied those rights that should be protected by the state.

People are born homosexual and if you cannot enjoy marriage simply because you are a homosexual then this is ridiculous. People define marriage as the bond between two people who love each other; the homosexuals have the ability to feel love for each other and are comfortable with their lifestyle why should the government deny them legal marriages? Nevertheless, homosexuality has been proved to have a biological cause hence denying same-sex marriage is denying the citizens their freedom which is provided for in the constitution. The fight is to gain legal recognition since they cannot simply change the ways and religious beliefs in order to acquire religious recognition (Whitehead 70-76). According to a survey carried out on the number of people who support and oppose gay marriages, a citizen said that they actually do not dislike the gays and lesbians they just differ with their regimes due to their cultural backgrounds and religious principles.

Legalizing gay marriages does not mean that the government should change how religion views homosexuals'. Religion is in a capacity to decide what people should and should not belief but it is the duty of the state to provide equal rights and freedom. A homosexual in an interview argued that the clerics do not actually have to execute these rituals if they are against them, moreover, they also do not have to perform these functions in churches since all that matter is that this is not religious question it is a legal right and should be granted regardless of the views of the religion (Yang 489-493). Religion argues that the general public should not be subjected to the lifestyles of the homosexuals and for this reason, the gays should be confined into their own community but the question that this argument raises is; isn't this close to segregation which is the greatest form of injustice that many states have been fighting? Homosexuality should be taken as more of inter-racial matrimonies. Many religious leaders argue that besides homosexuality being a sin it is also a mental disorder that can be treated through counseling of the victims. They also claim that the psychiatrists have found most of the mentally ill patients in the psychiatric wards tend to have this disorder as a result of alteration of the brain and other brain stimulants that defines a person's sexual orientation and the gender they should be attracted to.

For instance the prominent case of Loving vs. Virginia, it happened that a white man married a black woman in the Washington DC but the state of Virginia exiled them and refused to recognize their marriage, however, they sued the state and the court rules in their favor that the state cannot simply banish them due to their inter-racial marriage. According to Clement (533-537), there must be a system of equality set in to ensure that all citizens have justice; governing bodies implement ethical theories to ensure that the system has all the rights and needs of all the members of the society factored in. In the justice system of many states, the rule of law states that no one is above the law and that all citizens should be protected by the same laws. In the case of Baker vs. Vermont where a baker declined to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, the Vermont lesbians claimed that they are deprived of the rights and protection of other three hundred bylaws consequent to being prohibited to get married to each other. Since the Vermont house of representative supported the civil union bill for the homosexuals, it is clear that on the legitimate grounds of this matter, homosexuals are not viewed as equal with other citizens in the eyes of the law. Even though this case did not go the full marriage way the path is now very close.

Some of the outstanding reasons as to why gay marriages should be legalized are that just like the racial integration in the 1960s. This step had no negative impact on the white community the same argument applies here; legalizing gay marriages will not in any way interfere with the heterosexual marriages, on the contrary, it just grants the homosexuals a lawful right that has been wickedly withheld from them for so long(Baunach 348-351). Research has shown that 49% of the heterosexual married couples get divorced over issues of incompatibility as well as infertility, legal...