'Ethical Issues Surrounding Gay Marriage Essay\r'

'When I think of estimable issues in the humankind directly, animated hymeneals seems to hits me the hardest. Now Maybe it is the concomitant that I am bi informal myself or that I sire a human organism uncle who has been unify for 2 years. Either style, I am a strong supporter of the total union intromission, especi in on the wholey airy pairing. In this paper I for desexualise outgrowth indentify the respectable issue of hu valet spousal relationship and specific on the wholey explore the ethical paradoxs rattling matrimony presents including their pros and cons. I leave behind beca ingestion explain the classical guess of and tempt how it would resolve the problems at hand.\r\nNext I will continue by separate the speculative solution with perspective of towards intrepid trade union. Lastly, I will go alone(a) alone over which status is the closest to my admit somebody-to- soulfulness outlook of e at that placeal brotherhood. Let’s begin with the ethical issue at hand, Gay wedlock. The undecomposed for human being bitstocks to go a mode conjoin is fr decl ard upon in approximately of the world. In f propel, Gay Marriage is and has been 1 of the sterling(prenominal) ethical issues in the unify States since thrall and Women Rights. In my possess personal opinion, I cerebrate Same-sex Marriage should non be an ethical issue.\r\nWhat is unethical, is how A person whitethorn lie, cheat, or fornicate, and belt up experience the change of God; gloss over if they atomic number 18 in a queer relationship they ar somehow socially damned. I take by cut throughing whatever unityness person their war paint rights to equality is maltreat. If a person is homosexual and they choose to marry their pregnant separate, they subscribe to the civil right to do so under the constitution as a U. S. citizen. By denying any 1 person the right to marry whomever they choose, that is a violation of said persons civil rights, because espousals pisss legal civil status.\r\nWe all atomic number 18 Ameri rats who present the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. How fag anyone deny Americans this right originally because of their sexual orientation? hatful insolence themselves on cosmos law persistent citizens, except choose to discriminate against homosexual person’s spiritstyle and cope interest found on the so called facts written umteen an(prenominal) years ago in a â€Å" apparitional” book. The intelligence is non the law! That is one issue that approximately apparitional conclaves choose non yet grasped. No matter what any one person’s phantasmal beliefs be, there is no law,\r\npower, or bureau that gives them the right to push their sacred beliefs onto some early(a)’s life. I do non nor abide I ever estimate religion should ever be the decision making factor in the worlds verdict closely animate d nuptials? Today the increase acceptance of homosexuality is a beam threat to the domination of traditional Christian norms. According to the Christian Bible and some(prenominal) other religions texts, there is the weigh that spousal is meant totally between a man and women, anything else is considered a act of sin.\r\nHowever, due to the book of account stating that one should not pass thinker on another, umpteen an(prenominal) church servicees are to a greater extent recently accept said(prenominal)-sex couples. Personally blab outing, many another(prenominal) religious â€Å"church goers” use the discussion as a means to flack snap uper others. They walk around presenting this holier than thou appearance, scarcely neglect to follow all of the teachings their pa cancelledice possesses. It is funny how those comparable religious groups that canvas to press that gay marriage is a sin are the same mountain that are protesting to band their clawrenâ⠂¬â„¢s macrocosm schools of religious content and practices.\r\nThe separation of perform and State has been put into place in many U. S. cities. K right offing this, I do not view how any disposal is to follow the rules on the separation of church and state, exclusively and then be prone the right to place laws against gay marriage but based of the Bibles written word. transgenders do not spend time passing game around telling straight concourse that they are not allowed to engage in intercourse until marriage, while that’s in the give-and-take. The Bible vs. The Constitution seems to play the biggest role in the argument against gay marriage.\r\nPeople do stated, â€Å"the constitution should be changed, its outdated. ” However, their intact argument is incorporating the first amendment right of exemption of speech. before the constitution was written, passing game against the organisation was illicit. No one was allowed to speak their minds. I know that even off in the bible when one went against what god said they were punish or put to death. Heterosexuals don’t the likes of certain(prenominal) rights in the constitution that go against their witness personal beliefs, but will turn and cater to others, like freedom of speech.\r\nWithout some of those rights it would be unlawful for me to write this paper. Plus, I would have been dispatch some time ago for being a white and black, bisexual man. what most bust to realize is that yes the bible popular opinion of gays as a sin but it to a fault listed a number of other acts as sin. If our lives were truly run solely by the Bible’s scriptures, Gay marriage would be the last of the straight persons problems. in particular when most of the worlds murders are committed by heterosexuals. I in person do not like to base my arguments off a source un slight I plan to use the entire source as foundation.\r\nI cannot grade the constitution is wrong solely off on ri ght I do not consort with. scarcely turn around and accept the others that cater to my better living. That would label me as a hypocrite. bonny like how many mass use their religious beliefs to crusade gay rights, but fail to follow other aspects of the bibles teachings. I am conscionable human, who am I to judge anyone. This is just one of the many reasons wherefore I can argue that many of the firm guessrs against gay marriage are set in hypocritical views. People against gay marriage claim that marriage is dedicated to place-go a family.\r\nThey argue that with marriage you have children and build a happy home. However, for many plurality, marriage is to a greater extent about drive in and mutual trust than about scratch line a family, and so they would enjoin that gay marriage is not an issue. So for those who say it’s only to start a family, I would call this a psychoneurotic fantasy. For one there are much broken homes in the world now than anything. No w yes, Homosexual couples cannot physically manifold on their own. However, this does not give reasonability to deny the couple the right to marry. There are heterosexual couples that cannot physically have children of their own as well.\r\nThere are many women out in the world that cannot require children due to a numerous enumerate of health issues. My own aunt Kelly was told that she can never have children of her own. Her body just doesn’t have the strength and or properly functioning organs to require life. The same goes for many men. I have a neighbor that recently told me that he has a condition that denies him the ability to start reproductive sperm. As he likes to say, â€Å"he is shooting blanks. ” Knowing this I didn’t see any administration laws fish filet them from getting hook up with. My aunt was told about her inabilities to birth, over 20 years ago.\r\nToday she has been married twice. May I remind you that she is a heterosexual woman t hat cannot have children of her own and is still licitly allowed to marry. In today’s world, there are many alternative options for couples to start a family. The most popular way is conjoinion. Also, there is some(prenominal) much controversy no-a-days regarding adoption . It has give-up the ghost apparent that more and more Homosexual couples are going outside of the United States to adopt children. They are oblige to go outside of the United states due to the fact that they are not legally allowed to adopt here in the states.\r\nLesbian and gay-parented families may be more likely than others to allow in members from more than one ethnic group . So because the government activity postulates to discriminate against the homosexual lifestyles, there are more and more American children left without a home. No one that can legally adopt them is stepping up for the responsibility. It is true that you truly keep something more that you have to fight for. My nanna used to tell me this since I was genuinely teenage. There are so many heterosexuals out there that are â€Å" dreadful parents” or that take the gift of parenting for granted.\r\nThey do doses and give way extreme decisions that break up their families or make the decision to relieve themselves of the responsibility of parenting all together. I speak from person experience. As a young boy at the age of 5, my pose gave me and my 5 younger siblings up to child protective services. At the time she chose her friends and her drug abuse over her children and family. She did not precaution whether we would be okay or not, she dropped me off with only 1 shoe. All my get down cared about was being able to get high without the guilt of us comprehend her do it.\r\nI ended up back in the family, but my siblings were all separated some are still in the system. Now I personally have never seen a homosexual couple that are bad parents. It is usually the exact opposite. Homosexual coup les have to fight in order to build their families so they try not to do anything to mess that chance up. I have similarly never met a homosexual couple that didn’t exigency children. Along with starting families, those against gay marriage also argue that children brought up in a same-sex marriage put uphold are taught morals and beliefs.\r\n round say that this type of household is baneful to the child, that it teaches them to go against â€Å"our origin”. what if their families do not share in the same religious beliefs as others. Contrary to what most assume, there are many people that do not believe in God. Just like there are many cultures that believe in gay rights. So no one can make the basis of their argument on â€Å"the creator” when not everyone believes in him. Also, they like to say that by growing up in a gay household, the child is going to turn gay. the association between religious attendance and attitudes\r\ntoward gay marriage is nego ciate by a belief that sexual orientation is a choice or else than innate & . This is so comic in so many ways. For one being gay is not a disease, you can’t just catch it. Being gay is not something you experience like a accent. People are not made gay they are born gay; its just a matter of when they decide to accept it. I was raised(a) in a house with a male and female parenting role, and I still knew I was different. I am a bisexual male and so are many of my friends. These friends of mine were raised in all types of different households, but known were raised in same-sex households.\r\nAt the same time I have 3 friends that were adopted and raised by deuce homosexual men and not a single one of them are gay. They are all in heterosexual relationships and never once thought of being with the same-sex. These are a few examples of dissimilarity against gay marriage. Another major problem with gay marriage that people are beginning to argue is the affect of heterose xual couples. Many people argue that the world will change for heterosexual couples if same-sex marriages were allowed. Income taxes is one on the many reasons they have fuck this outrages claim.\r\nMany people are in the belief that income taxes will be increased. Also, the IRS gives certain impute and benefits to those individualistics that have children and other dependants. Heterosexuals believe that the government will be forced to apply the same financial benefits and credits on income taxes towards homosexual couples which they believe will lower everyone’s benefits. Along with their income taxes, they’re under the assumption that social hostage taxes will increased and the benefits decrease if the government has to provide accommodation for these same-sex married couples.\r\n unity of the more common ignorant claims is regarding heath care. People are arguing that their health check insurance premiums will rise based on these stereotypical images of homos exual lifestyles. They have always believed that homosexuals get diseases and illnesses like assist or HIV easier than heterosexuals. Based on this belief they think that there will be a higher health care needs associated to the treatment of these more at risk diseases. These potential changes in circumstances do not hold enough credibility to deny a person the right to join the institution of marriage.\r\nIt is unethical to claim the power to get the hang if someone can get married. around of the world believes Gay marriage is unethical. I have to dis mate with that assumption. This is another way that heterosexuals choose to be hypocrites. Using put marriage as an example, I rebel my case. Mostly everyone in the world, whether homosexual or heterosexual, can agree that arranged marriage is unethical. Many people believe that all want arranged marriage is wrong because you should have the right to choose whom you marry. So how is that any different than what homosexuals want. \r\nHomosexuals are also being denied the chance to marry who they choose. once more being hypocritical! People believe Marriage is about love and commitment. twain homosexuals and those forced into arranged marriages are victims. uncomplete gets to decide what they want to do, how to live, who to love. The only divergency between the two is that at least arranged marriage is marriage. The couple that is really in love cannot be married. When two people fall in love, they all want the same thing. They dream of this life together, married, with a family, and more. Why should homosexuals be revoked that reality.\r\nIt should not matter if you are gay or straight, you should be able to get married if you want. On another note I also, do not believe that anyone should have to travel away from home to legally get married. Some people have to travel multiple states away, because none of the states full them allow same-sex marriage. The day that all 50 states come to the same decision accepting gay marriage will not come anytime soon, but I do hope I am still alive to see a life-threatening size amount of them jump the bandwagon. This is one way that would begin to solve the issue.\r\nWhen it comes to gay marriage, I believe the classical theory of Utilitarianism would help solve many of the problems. Utilitarianism is a consequential theory. It is the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most rock-steady . The Utilitarian view seeks to maximize the boilers suit good in a situation. In other words, one should always act in a way that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It is turn up that there are fewer people against same-sex marriage, than for it. So the theory of Utilitarianism is the best annunciation to the issue the ethical problems of gay marriage.\r\nIf the government acted with utilitarian views, then we would have less anger, debate, spend less money on a unnecessary battle. Along with this v iew one would also need a pass off perspective of the issue. A clear perspective of the issue of same-sex marriage would be relativism. Relativism is the idea that one’s beliefs and pry are understood in scathe of one’s society, culture, or even one’s own individual values . It is the philosophical concept that all points of view are equally valid, and that all truth is relative to the individual .\r\nboth sides that are involved realize that nevery side will ever agree nor neither side is right or wrong. Each Society, culture or religious group is formed by its own ethical values and beliefs, with how they see things to be right and wrong. I believe that when it comes to gay marriage everyone is going to have to agree to disagree. Religion is the top reason to why people are against same-sex marriage. What church goers fail to realize is that they are forcing their religious beliefs onto not only the homosexuals but to all.\r\nEveryone has their own views an d when Homosexuals try to voice theirs, they are attacked, (metaphorically). The only way that this problem is ever going to get anywhere is if both sides try to understand that just because everyone doesn’t share your same views and beliefs, that doesn’t make them wrong. The cannot ignorantly believe that everyone automatically shares their beliefs. Homosexuals are already at this point, they are the hypocrites in this situation. All they want is equality, the same equality that everyone else has been fighting for all these years.\r\nIn conclusion, I have indentified the ethical issue of gay marriage and explored the ethical problems gay marriage presents including the pros and cons. I then explained how the classical theory of Utilitarianism would resolve those problems. I continued by contrasting the theoretical solution with perspective of relativism towards gay marriage. Lastly, I went over which view is the closest to my own personal outlook of gay marriage. I do not believe that there should even be such a thing as â€Å"gay marriage”. The title itself is discriminatory.\r\nGay people do not go around referring to a heterosexual couple’s marriage as straight marriage. So why should a society filled with divers(a) lifestyles be allowed to refer to homosexual marriages as â€Å"gay marriage”. Marriage is marriage, either way. It should not be labeled as any other. Whether, heterosexual or Homosexual, it’s the same institution and should hold the same rights. At the end of the day I am a firm truster that the discrimination against gay marriage should be outlawed. Gay people do value the institution of marriage, therefore their relationship and want to marry is ethical in my eyes.\r\nReferences Driver, J. (2009, June 21). The news report of Utilitarianism. Retrieved from Stanford cyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato. stanford. edu/archives/sum2009/entries/utilitarianism-history/ Haider-Markel, D. P. (2008). Be liefs about the origins of homosexuality and support for gay rights. frequent Opinion Quarterly, 72, pp. 291â€310. doi:10. 1093/poq/nfn015 Mosser, K. (2010). Introduction to morals and Social Responsibility. San Diego: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Patterson, C. J. (2013). Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents: psychological science, Law, and Policy.\r\nPsychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1(S), 27â€34. Rosenfeld, M. J. (2007). The age of independence: Interracial Unions, Same-sex Unions, and the ever-changing American Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Swoyer, C. (2010, December 21). Relativism. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/relativism/ Todd, N. R. , & Ong, K. S. (2012). Political and theological Orientation as Moderators for the Association surrounded by Religious Attendance and Attitudes Toward Gay Marriage for White Christians. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 4(1), 56â€70.\r\ n'