In this modern age, I find it very difficult to believe the sacredness of marriage still exists. Reality TV celebrates wife swapping, celebrity marriages barely last as long as a paper bag in the rain (e.g., Britney Spears’ one-day marriage) and divorce rates are skyrocketing.
In that respect, the arguments for this holy state of matrimony existing solely between a man and woman on the grounds of being moral are ridiculous.
Though many people view homosexuality as a sin or immoral, I wonder why it matters so much to others whom another person sleeps with. Why don’t they realize love is just love?
The preoccupation in this country of who is doing what with whom and how they do it is alarming. In a place that claims such doctrines of liberty and freedom, one is not even granted the freedom to love any and everyone. There should be a distinction between “religious morality” and “humane morality.” Heterosexual people do not have a monopoly on “true love,” and the law should reflect not what people feel is “religious morality’s” right but that which is humanely moral and right under the law.
Another outcry from the anti-gay marriage movement claims homosexual matrimony is against God. Well folks, we live in a country, not in a church, and the laws of the church are separate from the laws of the land. Everyone in America is not a Christian or even religious. So this must also be examined in this consideration of rights.
Gay people are people. This should be understood and made clear. They are often hard-working, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens. Since gays pay taxes, taxes that include putting heterosexuals’ children through school, there should be some benefits for them as well. Our country was founded because colonists were taxed without representation in the government. Everyone is forced to pay taxes. Where are the benefits for gays who contribute to society?
Anti-gay marriage supporters often give arguments that allude to the sense that something will be taken away from the ideals of marriage. Gay people do not wish to take anything away from anyone; they just seek protection under the law for the life and goods they have accumulated together. Also, there is the issue of shared benefits and being able to make decisions for a partner when they are too ill to make choices for themselves. Which also adds to a gay person’s quality of life.
Gay people mean no harm to the institution of marriage; they just want to participate. If heterosexuals really want to give the “sacred” argument for the institution, I think a tremendous amount of Holy water is needed.
Mark Carter is a senior philosophy student from Tallahassee. Contact him at email@example.com.