Sample Paper on Same Sex Marriage

Same Sex Marriage

Introduction

            Same-sex marriage is identified as the union that involves a couple that is of a similar gender or biological sex. From 2001, 10 countries, in addition to other jurisdictions, have led to the success of the legalization of this union. Legal identification of same-sex marriage and the likelihood to carry out same-sex marriage is at times called equal marriage or marriage equality, mostly by its backers. Approval or disapproval of marriage equality remains a source of debate with respect to political, civil rights, and social interests.

Meaning of Marriage

            Defining the word marriage is a subject that frequently arises while discussing marriage equality. The expression “marriage” is not described unvaryingly across cultures. In early 1920s, the expression was embraced to signify an affiliation of a man and a woman, or women, which is identified by law and entails some lawful and social rights and obligations. People that are married also take an official duty for children that they bear. Nevertheless, contemporary descriptions of marriage have a great dissimilarity. For instance, the Oxford Dictionary has included the marriage equality from 2000. Nonetheless, numerous traditional books are yet to include the word same-sex marriages. For instance, Accuracy in Media calls for the application of quotation marks while signifying to a marriage involving a couple of the same sex.

Hullabaloo

            It is apparent from the changing descriptions of marriage that this subject bears a huge load of arguments. The backers of marriage equality frequently argue that affection creates sufficient stands for marriage, irrespective of sexual course. The opponents of same-sex marriages frequently refer to religious perspectives and issues concerning the getting of children as a major rationale behind their opposition. The disagreement with regard to marriage equality is an intricate one as it engages a lot of lawmaking, cultural, spiritual, and family concerns. From a lawful perspective, the opponents of same-sex marriage debate frequently have a conviction that the rights of marriage ought to be limited to couples of different gender. The supporters of marriage equality consider that marriage is a civil right and ought to have no limits to people of a given sexual orientation.

Even as very few societies have identified marriage equality as marriages, the past and anthropological account discloses a huge array of approaches towards marriage equality starting from extol, through complete approval and incorporation, considerate toleration, apathy, proscription and inequity, maltreatment, and physical eradication. The people that oppose marriage equality have stressed that approval of marriage equality wears down spiritual autonomy and that marriage equality, while benefiting that participating couples and their adopted children, weakens the right of children to be brought up by their biological parents. A number of backers of marriage equality have the perception that the government ought to have no responsibility in regulating personal affiliations, while some state that marriage equality could offer social gains to couples of the same gender. The dispute concerning marriage equality encompasses arguments anchored in social perspectives, in addition to the argument rooted in majority verdicts, spiritual convictions, monetary disagreements, health-associated issues, and a range of other concerns.

Heterosexual marriages are currently getting rough and what was earlier “it is only death that can separate us” has now become “or I choose to divorce you”.  The consequence of this controversy, as affirmed by supporters of marriage equality, is that heterosexual couples have no grounds to correct homosexual partners concerning their choices since a lot of heterosexual marriages do not succeed. Nonetheless, redefining marriage, by going the same-sex way, will lead to further weakening the institution and will not give any solution.

Many heterosexual families are losing either a father or mother while others, frequently through none of their mistake, are barren. Many couples that cannot bear children decide to adopt while some could devote their lives to assisting needy children. Unluckily, since procreation has turned out to be separated from marriage in our customs, some heterosexual couples wait to have children till it is not possible to do so. Some people even decide to embrace the incredible attempts to bear children via in-vitro fertilization, in addition to other methods that lead to the commoditization of existence. Rather than bringing life into existence, this creates annihilation of life at its most flimsy and susceptible stage. There is already the progress of making this disreputable and morally wrong performance a prerogative for marriage equality couples that are apparently not able to bear children in the normal method.

Reproduction requires the borders of marriage as marriage requires the borders of reproduction. The debate for marriage equality sounds straightforward and undemanding, but they veil hard and intricate inquiries. Heterosexual couples have been struggling with marriage for many years and it is still not simple. It demands a lot of efforts, endurances, and sacrifices. It is not possible to talk about heterosexual marriage truthfully devoid of admitting that there are no simple responses and nothing is by chance. In fact, this undying reality discloses the greatest mistake of the marriage equality cause: there is nothing like equal marriage since sameness does not exist in marriage.

Marriage Equality and Religion

            The arguments in approval and in disapproval of marriage equality controversy frequently engage spiritual aspects. A number of spiritual denominations do not want to associate or give aid to equal marriage couples. Christian groupings that are in support of marriage equality have a tendency of believing that gay and lesbian individuals were made in that manner by God and ought to have similar rights as other individuals. The religions that are against marriage equality argue that equal marriages are morally wrong, not in support of the will of God, and undermine the purpose of human sexuality, of generating children. The Jews differ in their approach to marriage equality.  The Muslim people candidly reject same-sex relationships, referring to the account of Lot in Sodom in their disapproval of marriage equality. The majority of people that embrace a given position with respect to marriage equality do so due to their conviction concerning family. Most of them state that a child has the right to be raised by his/her mother and father and that bringing up children in marriage equality denies them this right. On the contrary, scientific researches have established that children brought up in same-sex marriages are total capable of offering heterosexual parenting later in their lives as any other child.

The debate concerning marriage equality is great since a lot of social and legal aspects are entailed. Even though there is no definition of marriage currently accepted across the globe, political and social sets are trying their best to generate their own views and arguments. Controversy on approval and disapproval of marriage equality are still frequently generated on religious perspectives and are created with respect to spiritual set of guidelines. A given source of argument is whether marriage equality hampers the autonomy of religion. A number of religions cannot employ, give public housing, acceptance services, and other aids to marriage equality couples. The governments in some countries encompass freedom of worship requirements in same-sex marriage laws. The largest religious organizations across the globe differ significantly in their perspectives on marriage equality. For instance, among Christians, the perspective of the Roman Catholic, Islam, Hindus, and Orthodox believers is in opposition of marriage equality. Buddhism is regarded unsure on the topic en bloc. On the contrary, some religious organizations, encompassing some liberal Christians, Australian Buddhists, Muslims, and Hindus are in favor of marriage equality.

 

Conclusion

Women and men have varying flaws and strengths, capabilities, worries, and needs. Through the combination of these corresponding forces, a heterosexual marriage strengthens the couple than they would be separately. On the contrary, same-sex couples will inescapably have the majority of similar strengths and flaws. Rather than making homosexual couples stronger, redefining marriage will only intensify their flaws. Same-sex marriage is essentially about eradicating the wonderful and wonderful distinctions involving men and women, particularly the capacity to perpetuate humanity, not just by procreation, but in all spheres as parents and members of communities in general. Marriage is a fundamental force in the communities since it makes a couple become better people. Same-sex marriage makes it a genderless institution, in addition to robbing marriage its very quintessence that makes it valuable. Even when marriage equality supporters succeed in the debate, same-sex marriages will remain an unbeneficial institution.