Marriage: Homo v Hetero

March 30, 2013
Custom User Avatar
More by this author
The following article is written to present two arguments for either side of the marriage debate which is consuming the U.S.
As this topic is one of the most talkative and controversial in the country, I thought it best to present the facts of both sides of this argument without any bias.
I’ll begin with the Homosexual party.
Marriage Equality. Homosexual couples’ strongest argument to legalize gay marriage is equality. The homosexual party wants to end the discrimination against gays being married. The majority of the country only sees marriage as the institution between a man and a woman. These states do not recognize two men or two women as married, and deny them the benefits that an ordinary married couple would receive. Homosexual party compares themselves to the civil rights movement in the 1960s.
They say that it is a right that every human being can love anyone and to marry that person, regardless of their gender. One couple outside the Supreme Court had a sign that compared the illegality of Africran-Anglo-Saxon marriage in the past to the illegally of homosexual marriage. “Love, commitment and responsibility” is the homosexual definition of marriage, according to the people outside the Supreme Court on March 26.
The Natural Marriage party or Traditional Marriage party does not even consider homosexual ‘marriage’ marriage. This is their first argument: Homosexual Marriage does not exist. Marriage, the traditional party says, is between one man and one woman. Marriage has to be between one man and one woman because, the party says, and that marriage’s purpose is to have children — to reproduce.
Biologically and naturally speaking (without scientific help) only a man and a woman can produce a child.
The Traditional Marriage party concentrates on the main purpose of marriage—to produce a family, which homosexual couples cannot do.
This party continues its first point in its second. Boldly, the Traditional party declares that the act of homosexuality is a disorder against human nature. The reasoning behind this daring statement is that it disrupts the nature of the sexual act—to be sexually complete and produce children. Only a man can sexually complete a woman and only a woman can sexually complete a man. An analogy is that of a puzzle pieces. Only the other half of the puzzle can complete the picture.
Ultimately, this issue will send shock waves around the country and world. Marriage is an institution that has been alive for as long as the human race. Now in our country we come to a scene similar to a western film— “this town ain’t big enough for the two of us” between the two parties.

Post a Comment

Be the first to comment on this article!

Site Feedback