Tags: Using Tables And Figures In An Academic Research PaperSolve Physics Problems Online FreeTerm Paper Cover PageEssay On Famine Affluence And MoralityEssay On Nietzsche PhilosophyBoris Murmann Phd ThesisAdrienne Rich Claiming An Education ThesisNew Business Plan Presentation
I am a gay man who, when arguing for gay marriage, has been called “lesser”, “unnatural”, “deviant” and “sinful”. I do not believe all opponents of gay marriage are hateful.In these arguments the love I have for my fiancé has been belittled as just “sex” or only “friendship”. Some have just not been exposed to the right arguments, and so I will demonstrate here that each anti-gay marriage argument ultimately serves to oppress or imply the lesser status of the minority of which I am a part.I would ask them to stop focusing on my genitals, and start paying attention to my humanity. “Gay marriage will confuse the terms ‘husband’ and ‘wife’, or ‘mother and ‘father’.” Another form of the previous argument. “Gay people cannot have children and so should not be allowed to marry.” The Archbishop of York John Sentamu used a barely disguised version of this argument in a piece for the when he referred to “the complementary nature of men and women”.
“We need to protect marriage.” The word “protect” implies that gay people are a threat to the institution of marriage.
To imply that including same-sex couples within the definition of marriage will somehow be detrimental or even destructive for the institution is to suggest gay people must be inherently poisonous.
It also implies a nefarious gay mafia that is out to wreck marriage for straight people. “We must preserve traditional marriage.” Given that marriage has always changed to suit the culture of the time and place, I would refrain from ever calling it “traditional”.
Naturally if such a mafia existed I would be bound by a code of honour to deny its existence. If marriage was truly traditional, interracial couples would not be allowed to wed, one could marry a child, ceremonies would be arranged by parents to share familial wealth and the Church of England would still be under the authority of the Pope. “Marriage is a sacred institution.” The word “sacred” suggests marriage is a solely religious institution.
The Office for National Statistics shows how civil, non-religious marriage made up 68 per cent of all marriages in the UK during 2010.
Let us not forget matrimony existed long before Jehovah was even a word you weren’t allowed to say. “Marriage has always been a bond between one man and one woman.” This declaration ignores the legally married gay couples in Canada, Spain, Portugal, Argentina, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Belgium, Netherlands, and South Africa.
May I refer him to the elderly or infertile straight couples who cannot produce children? “But studies have shown heterosexual parents are better for children.” No, they have not.
If a complementary relationship hinges on procreative sex, are these relationships unnatural? Dozens of studies have shown gay people to be entirely capable of raising children.
It conveniently forgets the 48 countries where polygamy is still practised. “Gay marriage will confuse gender roles.” This hinges on the idea that gender roles are or should be fixed, as dictated by scripture, most often cited for the sake of healthy child development.
It also omits from history the married gay couples of ancient China and Rome, Mormon polygamy, and the ancient Egyptians who could marry their sisters. The love and care homosexual couples routinely provide children are, it would seem, irrelevant.