What are the arguments that lead people to not support gay marriage?
1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can’t legally get married because the world needs more children.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if homosexual marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears’ 55-hour, just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
5. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are property, blacks can’t marry whites, and divorce is illegal.
6. Gay marriage should be decided by people not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of the minorities.
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
10. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven’t adapted to cars or longer life spans.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a “separate but equal” institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages for gays and lesbians will.
I would phrase it as an equality issue. To do so, you would need to provide a rejection of certain views of those opposing gay marriage: – Sexual orientation as primarily a matter of choice (use genetic and sociological evidence) – Address the argument re “changing the definition of marriage” (the definition of marriage is already fluid; women used to be exchanged by their parents to a potential husband for a dowry, and for millennia this was a primary function of marriage). Further, the definition of a thing does not change the substance of a particular relationship anyways. – Issues regarding the separation of church and state (per the US constitution) regarding the fundamentally religious nature of limiting marriageable parties. If you’re Canadian, gay marriage is clearly covered by s. 15 of the Charter (as the SCC has laid down), and most other constitutions will cover it under their respective equality provisions, but I don’t believe that the US one does. – Limiting “marriage” and providing some separate has legal consequences if the same law does not provide penalties for providing couples with this other status different treatment under law than married couples. This is a live issue particularly regarding adoption by gay couples. – The “it is unnatural” argument is extremely weak, but it is difficult to address because there is so little substance behind it. Most opponents to gay marriage refuse to establish what is “natural” and what is not, and why it is better to be ‘natural’ vs being ‘unnatural’. I would address it, but it is not worth a lot of space in an academic paper. – The religious argument should be countered (as you would address any other argument) by assessing its credibility objectively and accepting or rejecting it based on that. Religious texts generally do not stand up to any kind of logical scrutiny regarding an assessment of credibility, but since religious people tend to get offended when their religious beliefs are treated with the same scrutiny as any other kind of belief, I wouldn’t touch upon this.
I feel about it the way Jeremy Clarkson does. Writing in the Sunday Times he said:
‘Of course you can’t have same-sex weddings. It undermines the whole point of marriage, the concept that two people form a stable unit in which children can be conceived and raised. Arguing that homosexuals should be allowed to marry is as silly as arguing that I should be allowed to play for Manchester United.
I was born with the ball skills of an emperor penguin, so I can’t play football.
Andrew Lloyd Weber was born with a face like a melted wellington, so he can’t be a model. And if you’re born with a predilection for members of the same genital group, you can’t get married. Get over it.
And yet, actually, it’s me that will have to get over it, because soon my children’s generation will be in charge and they see nothing odd about boys marrying their boyfriends.’
It’s a generational thing. I am roughly the same generation as Jeremy Clarkson, so I find the whole idea of gay marriage absoutely baffling. But young people think it’s quite okay. It is just one of those things.
Support, or challenge? Plenty of people ignore the movement because they feel it takes attention away from issues that hurt the GLBT community more, like murder and workplace discrimination.
As to religion and legalization, this is one reason a general vote doesn’t work for issues of human rights. Asking the majority to grant a minority rights means they’re not rights, but privileges.
Sezy7…you’re such a sad, hopelessly oblivious moron that I can’t even bring myself to give you a thumbs-down. It’d be like pushing a two-legged puppy.
As for the argument of love not being the same for a gay couple for biological reasons: guess what? There are gay animals. And I’m not just talking about ones in zoos, where it could be brushed off as a symptom of insanity. There are gay giraffes, gay penguins, gay seagulls, etc. And incidents of homosexuality in wild animals increase as their population does.
Homosexuality is Mother Nature’s population control, attempting to keep certain species (primarily herbivores) in check in case something goes out of whack and their population starts to get too high. All species that don’t reproduce asexually are meant to have sexual urges programmed in. Rather than producing a bunch of asexual creatures, their urges just get tweaked to draw them to the same sex. Once the population begins to drop to more reasonable levels, fewer of the newborns grow up homosexual.
The feelings of love for the same gender can be just as intense as love for the opposite. Take it not just from biology, but from a bisexual.
People in gay marriages generally don’t have children but many people in heterosexual marriages also don’t have children and it’s often by choice. Why are heterosexuals who have no intention of ever having children allowed to get married but two people of the same sex aren’t?
OMG you guys want a logical argument? Most of the time you guy’s arguments are “They’re equal” which isn’t an argument. Here’s one in case you guys can’t think of one.
At the center of every marriage is love obviously. And what is love? Love at it’s scientific level is a chemical signal in your brain(Just like serotonin is for sadness) That encorages you to procreate, if you don’t believe me look at every relationship 99.9% of them end in sex and sex’s purpose is for procreation(like it or not, it is). So i then can say love is for the purpose of procreation, however two men cannot reproduce so therfore the love between them is NOT the same as the love between a man and a woman. And obviously there are different types of love but still i can say the two types of love are not the same and so therefore since it is not truelove it deserves none of the rights, benefits, or titles given to true love. And therefore it deserves no place in marriage. All of this I CAN PROVE.
I also have this to say i have yet to hear ONE logical argument for gay marriage, everyone i hear is “They’re equal” THATS NOT AN ARGUMENT. If you can find one that involves science and logic and things you can prove im all ears.
There are none.
It all comes down to “I just FEEL I am better than them. My life choices demand validation. Theirs don’t.”
Having children is clearly not the only reason people marry, or barren, childfree, and elderly couples wouldn’t be allowed to marry. However, every study performed by such “fringe groups” like National Pediatric/Pediatric Psych Associations and National Child Advocacy Centers shows that children raised in a stable gay home do as well, on average, as those in a stable heterosexual home. Stability is the single most important thing you can give to a child.
(Don’t believe me, look it up for yourself. Just make sure you check the sources for the studies you’ll find. A kill-the-gays Christian group comparing five gay ghetto crack families against five middle class straight families is probably not the study you want to make your decisions off of. )
Currently, creating instability in gay families is hurting a lot of children, keeping them from being insured, keeping them from being safe in case of the death of one partner, and on and on. Well done Christian (and atheistic bigot) child advocates!
Blue Eyed Christian agrees that gays have the right to marry – that she shouldn’t pro-actively do anything to stop it – though she retains the right to disapprove.
Baby steps – but an improvement.
well…i dont agree with many of the statements here. There are no logical reasons NOT to support gay marriages because they are NOT AFFECTING YOU WHATSO EVER!!!! people should have freedom of choice, it is what this country was BUILT on. The freedom of speech, religion, etc…all of these are things we value today. Yet it seems that we are able to twist them to our advantage when we dislike something, or easily forget them. To comment on “. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control.” ..yet those are not natural, but WIDELY EXCEPTED AND USED BY MANY!!!!!!! people need to get over their differences and quit trying to control others lives. gays getting married have NOTHING to do with any one else. it is their CHOICE to be MARRIED, GET OVER IT!!! Our contry was created because people were persecuted and traveled here so they could do what they wanted without interference, it seems we dont care for that anymore. We can persecute people in our own country, it doesnt matter that many of them COULD BE OUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY!!!!! Why would gays choose this lifestyle?? they are hated and persecuted and ridiculed by many of their friends and MUCH OF THIS COUNTRY!!! who would CHOOSE and WANT to live like that??? America needs to get over their complex and quit being childish about this. Everyone has their own views, i understand, but just because you disagree dont prevent someone elses happiness. and dont ever say that gays are stupid and unequal, because they arent. see someone elses side of the story for once, please.
Oh: and please PLEASE dont listen to $0.02 RETURNS because the points that they are making are invalid..such as “Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.” seeing as SOMEHOW gays had to become gay…and i personally know MANY STRAIGHT COUPLES that have gay children. and the children are nice, respectfull, responsible KIND children that DO NOT deserve this kind of ridicule. you people against gays that call them names and ridicule them have no COMPASSION or SYMPATHY or any FEELING WHATSO EVER for them!! please, a little respect people!