On Thursday, October 18th I wrote about an article talking about same sex marriage. The article mentions this year during election season same sex marriage will be some of the 50 states ballots including
Maryland. If you would like to read more on that article you can find the link in my previous post. I will however go into more detail on my opinion for same sex marriage and the thoughts our government has toward it.
Same sex marriage seems to be a touchy subject here in the
United States of America. In ways I understand why, especially for people who have strong religious affiliation. It is not in the bible, and it is not the way things are "supposed" to be. Marriage is "supposed" to be the joining of a male and female in holy matrimony. However, times have changed and if two people of the same sex want to marry they should have the freedom to do so. I understand why people might have a problem with this happening in a church, but there are other ways to get married. They can get married in a court house, justice of the peace, they can even have a wedding at a venue and have the justice of the peace marry them rather than and priest, father, or pastor.
President Obama seems to be open to the idea that "gay is ok". According to the
Washington post in 2012 Obama pushed to lift the ban on gays serving openly in the military, undoing the don't ask/ don't tell policy put in place by the last democratic president. President Obama had a slow evolution to same sex marriage and came out in support. He encouraged
Maryland,
Maine and
Washington to allow same-sex marriage and this year it will be on the ballots. He also urged some states to vote against marriage prohibition.
Presidential candidate Mitt Romney according the Washington Post has not brought up the topic in his conventions, campaign trail or debates. However, according to
2012 Republican Candidates Romney is not open to the idea of same sex marriage. He states marriage is an institution between a man and woman. He does say though that basic civil rights and appropriate benefit should be available to people in non-traditional relationships.
I have a feeling that over the next few years same sex marriage will become a popular topic of discussion and that more states will be allowing same sex marriage. Though I am typically very conservative in my ideology same sex marriage is a topic where I swing the other way and look forward to living in place where people can marry no matter who their partner is.
In a recent blog post on USA Today entitled “The Continued Rant”, the author brings to light her opinion on the sensitive subject of same sex marriages. There is no use in trying to believe that same sex marriage is simply a phase or chapter in our country due to the velocity at which it has blossomed into a full-fledged, heated debate. Like every argument, there are two sides; the one that believes same sex marriage is an abomination to the constitution of marriage, and the other that holds fast to the belief that we can only benefit from extending marital rights to gay citizens. While the author of this post stands in the community favoring same sex marriage, I have to disagree. However, before I continue, I would like to state that while I do not acquiesce to the constitution of same sex marriage, I absolutely don’t believe gays should be ostracized or ridiculed for their standpoint on this subject; I only disagree with the notion of same sex marriage. Furthermore, I believe that marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman, and I have several reasons to explain the foundation of my belief.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, the author of this post notes that people should have the freedom to marry whoever they please, even those of the same sex. I believe, however, that the very idea of same sex marriage weakens the definition and respect for the entire institution of marriage. Although it is quite cliché and has been said many times before, I completely agree that marriage is a ceremony between one man and one woman. When a same sex marriage takes place, it greatly abates the marital ceremony that is not only a sacred ceremony but is also critical to the prosperity of our traditional family values that are essential to our society.
Secondly, the essence of same sex marriages would further weaken traditional family values by greatly affecting the children that are directly and indirectly involved in these relationships. The author does not mention the affects these relationships could inflict on children, and I don’t believe this is something to ignore. To illustrate, children that are brought into the circle of gay couples would certainly be confused about gender roles and expectations that are being confronted and challenged. Since the beginning, a certain custom and tradition has been deeply rooted into our society, and if we further question these values, we could quite possibly loose sight of the entire notion of marriage, and in the process, we could hurt and inflict serious consequences upon the children involved.
Finally, if we allow the legalization of gay marriage, would we then be satisfied? Possibly, but possibly not. If we encourage this kind of lifestyle, we could very well fall into a trend of altering and morphing the legality of marriage. The author writes that she is excited for a world where people can marry freely, but I believe if we allow that to happen, we will not be wholly satisfied. For instance, polygamy and polyandry could follow, and soon, monogamy could be thing of the past.
In summary, I do not acquiesce to the notion of same sex marriage. Moreover, I believe if we wholly condone gay marriage, it will certainly not be the end, and in the process, we will manage to misinform and mislead the children involved in these relationships, but most importantly, we will heavily damage the very constitution of marriage.