Same Sex Marriages In 38 States example essay topic

Marriage is legally defined and summed up as, a contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought to exist between husband and wife. Many liberals argue that gay marriage should be legal in the United States. In the following essay I will attempt to argue why marriage between the same sexes is immoral and unjust. The first point I will talk about is how marriage is a traditional bond between a man and a woman. In the bible; which contains most of the values this country was founded upon, stated that marriage is an institution that only a man and a woman can enter. The teaching of the bible says marriage is for procreation and the continuation of species, and people of the same sex cannot physically have children.

Families of same sex marriages are not the optimum environments to raise children. Children who are raised in a same sex environment are more inclined to pick up their parents sexuality and lifestyle. Children should be raised in a heterosexual environment, which is biologically correct. Children should not be brought up with a predisposition to be homosexuals or lesbians. The purpose of marriage is to protect our children not our sexual preferences. "With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman.

Textbooks, even in conservative states, will have to depict man / man and woman / woman relationships, and stories written for children as young as elementary school, or even kindergarten, will have to give equal space to homosexuals 1" Same sex marriages will also put a strain on our social security and tax system. "How about the impact on Social Security if there are millions of new dependents that will be entitled to survivor benefits? It will amount to billions of dollars on an already overburdened system. And how about the cost to American businesses?

Unproductive costs mean fewer jobs for those who need them. Are state and municipal governments to be required to raise taxes substantially to provide health insurance and other benefits to millions of new 'spouses and other dependents'? 2 Same-sex marriage would threaten the traditional values, morals and the sacred institution of marriage. It would most likely lead to radical liberal social reforms. If we do not put our foot down and keep things traditional and the way they were for centuries, what's to say that liberals will not try to change things that would degrade the values of society?

Would you want there to be legalized prostitution in every state, legalized drug use and less punishment for sex offenders? President Bush's standpoint on this issue is clearly against gay marriage. In a recent statement from President Bush on February 24, 2004, Bush wants to amend the constitution to contain the Defense of Marriage Act. The Defense of Marriage act was passed eight years ago by president Clinton, and banned same sex marriages in 38 states. The Defense of Marriage Act legally defines marriage between a man and a woman, but cities and arbitrary courts tried to change the definition of marriage and issued thousands of marriage licenses throughout the country. President Bush stated "After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization.

Their actions have created confusion on an issue that requires clarity. On a matter of such importance, the voice of the people must be heard. Activist courts have left the people with one recourse. If we " re to prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever, our nation must enact a constitutional amendment to protect marriage in America. Decisive and democratic action is needed because attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country". I myself agree with president Bush's plan to limit marriage to a bond between a man and a woman, but there are many difficulties associated to amend the constitution.

Amending the Constitution is difficult, requiring a two-thirds majority each in the House and Senate and ratification by three-fourths, or 38, of the 50 states. Besides the Bill of Rights, the Constitution has been amended only 17 times in 215 years, most recently in 1992. Limiting marriage to only same sex is not discriminatory. It is only based on natural and traditional sexual orientation. Living in America grants you certain freedoms but marriage is a bond in which only a man and a woman can join. I agree other civil arrangements can be undertaken between members of the same sex, but to call it marriage would be wrong.

Not one person in this country can tell you what to do or whom you can live with but by using the sacred bond marriage and applying it to the same sex is not morally right. Societies have long recognized that allowing civil rights to certain groups may offend some, and at times, even the majority. But that is why constitutional government was established -- to ensure that powerless, unpopular minorities are still protected from the tyranny of the majority 3. I'm for equal protection of every person living in this country even if I see his or her opinions right wrong or indifferent. If we were able face the founding fathers and the framers of the United States Constitution on this controversial issue they would be astounded that people today would even be considering gay marriages. President bush bluntly states "Today, I call upon the Congress to promptly pass and to send to the states for ratification an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage. America's a free society, which limits the role of government in the lives of our citizens. This commitment of freedom, however, does not require the redefinition of one of our most basic social institutions". Conclusion: Marriage should be protected under the constitution and the civil rights of those mentioned should also be protected. I believe marriage is not a right; it is a privilege and structure in which to raise children in a conductive positive environment.

Children should be raised to the standards and expectations of the majority in today's society. Granting marriage to same sex couples will degrade society and lead to downward social changes. I am confident in the government's leadership that they not take this controversial issue lightly and will do whatever necessary to preserve the values in which this great country we live in was founded upon.

Bibliography

1. Dobson, Dr. James. "Gay Marriage: Why Would it Affect Me?" Marriage Under Fire. Argument 4.27 Nov. 2004 2.
Dobson, Dr. James. Argument 7.27 Nov. 2004 3.
Bidstrup, Scott. "Gay Marriage Arguments and the Motives". 27 Nov. 2004 Bush, George W.
Transcripts of a Bush Statement" CNN 24 Feb. 2004.
CNN. 27 Nov 2004.