Philosophical debate: Gay Marriage

Are you against the legalization of gay marriage, or “Marriage Equality?” If so, please scroll down and find your primary objection to see a brief argument in favor of marriage equality.

I will keep each argument very brief, and elaborate farther if people wish to debate the topic. Please do comment and share your thoughts below.



SOME COMMON OBJECTIONS...

IT IS UNNATURAL
There are several documented cases of homosexuality in other species occurring in nature.

Wikipedia entry for “Homosexual Behavior in Animals”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals



IT IS GROSS
Should fat people also not be allowed to be married or have sexual intercourse? Ugly people? People with unattractive personalities? Old people? Obviously not, so why should homosexuals not be allowed to marry? Maybe they think your heterosexual sexual intercourse and marriage is gross. (By the way, why are you spending your mental energy picturing these people having sex anyway?)

HOMOSEXUALS CANNOT PROCREATE (have children)
Should marriage between an infertile or elderly heterosexual couple also be made illegal? Or should couples who plan not to have children not be allowed to marry? Should it be required that all married couples have at least one child? What if a heterosexual couple marries, planning on having children, but then discovers that they cannot naturally conceive- should they be required to divorce?

SLIPPERY SLOPE
A common form of this argument may be something like, “If we allow homosexuals to marry, then next thing you know we will be allowed to marry children, or our pets!”

First of all, the slippery slope argument is illogical no matter what the topic.

But specifically regarding homosexuality, it should be said that there is a big difference between two consenting adults agreeing to abide by a legal contract (ie, a marriage license), and a marriage between a minor or non-consenting animal. Consent by both adults is the important requirement for marriage. Gay marriage fulfills the requirements of both a) consent and b) being an adult.

TAX/HEALTH BENEFITS FRAUD
The argument is simply that heterosexual roommates of the same sex may engage in a “fake” homosexual marriage to receive tax benefits, or other benefits such as health care. This may be true, but it is also true of heterosexual couples who could also fake a marriage. For example, people will get married just to receive a green card.

THREAT TO TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE
How? How does it even affect you? If you don't support gay marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex.

RELIGIOUS/MORAL REASONS
As briefly as I can, I will summarize my thoughts on this topic. I will be happy to go into greater depth with anyone who so wishes.

Morality can generally be categorized as either being personal/theistic (i.e., will what I do hurt myself, or hurt/offend God?) or relational (i.e., will what I do hurt others?) It is the government’s job to protect its people from harm, so of the three types of morality, only relational morality should be legislated upon. Personal or theistic morality does not hurt other people, so although it is important for your own fulfillment and success to develop your own personal morals, it is not necessary to legally impose these morals on others.

In addition, even if you view theistic morality as the absolute highest morality, the kind that trumps any manmade laws (as most religious people do) I still argue that you do not need to legislate theistic morality. Most religions teach that righteousness comes from within. You cannot simply make a list of rules, follow this list, and be considered righteous without any sort of faith or belief in what you are doing. You must first establish a relationship with God, and then the outward signs of righteousness will become evident. This being the case, it does not seem conducive to promoting righteousness and honoring God to force someone to act righteously, or “morally,” even if you believe the morality is from the absolute highest source- God himself. So although you are free to believe homosexuality is morally wrong, you would not be honoring God by legally forcing others to live by those standards if they do not themselves believe in them.

There is a difference between something being moral/immoral, and something being legal/illegal.

(To be clear, I am not saying that I personally believe homosexuality is immoral. I am simply speaking to those who do.) 

IMPORTANT REASONS TO LEGALIZE GAY MARRIAGE 
Just a few of many important reasons to legalize gay marriage not just on a state level, but also federal.

• Stop an eviction when the landlord says unmarried adults cannot live together
• Get social security benefits the couple earned through involuntary deductions to their paychecks
• Get the legal right to family medical leave to care for an ill partner
• Make medical decisions for a partner in a coma
• Visit a dying partner in the hospital
• Carry out the wishes of a deceased partner for a memorial service and epitaph
• Keep the home and personal possessions after a partner dies without a will
• Receive health insurance benefits reserved for one's spouse 
• Receive tax benefits reserved for married couples 
• In cases of immigration, marriage allows for the application of a green card and US citizenship; unmarried couples may face deportation issues without a legal marriage. 
• In cases where children are involved, the list of legal benefits is extensive regarding co-parenting, adoption, custody, etc. and is infinitely easier to navigate as a legally married couple than as domestic partners or adults co-habitating with no legal recognition. 

ONE PROPOSED LEGAL SOLUTION

Instead of the government treating marriage as a religious sacrament, it should be viewed by the government solely as a contract between two consenting adults. The exact terms of the contract should be decided on between the individuals entering into it. And if the couple wishes to include a religious ceremony, or some sort of celebration at the time of the contractual union that is entirely up to them but has no particular bearing on the marriage contract from the government's perspective.

Right now, marriage is lost in a sort of gray-area between a religious rite and a legal contract. In a strictly legal sense, the two ideas need to be separated. The state and federal government need only to concern themselves with the legally binding contract itself. The individuals entering into the agreement can concern themselves with any religious affiliations they wish to make (or not make). Churches will not be forced to perform a religious rite on anyone that does not meet that particular church's standards for a marriage ceremony- but this has no effect whatsoever on the legal contract which is strictly the business of the government.

Furthermore, I suggest that other states institute the option to have self-uniting marriage licenses like they do in my home state of Pennsylvania. This means that all you need to do to legally bind yourself in marriage is to apply for the marriage license from the state, and have two witnesses sign the license with you. You do not need a priest or even a justice of the peace, because you have the power to legally unite yourselves.

It should also be noted that no church or religious institution would be forced to perform a marriage ceremony for gay couples if it is against the church's will.

This is just one option, and of course it is described in utmost brevity here. But many others have outlined this basic idea in much more detail which you can research for yourself online.

IN CONCLUSION
I am not arguing that an individual must condone homosexuality. Although I see no real reason why one should be against it. But each person has a right to decide for themselves what is moral. I simply ask that just like you get to decide to think it is immoral, you allow others to make the decision for themselves. You do not have to vote in favor of marriage equality if you feel you absolutely cannot. But you also do not have to actively vote against it. Just withhold your vote, if you cannot vote in favor.

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com