Hence, the author's argument is that just because some people in society see same-sex marriage as immoral, doesn't mean that it should be banned because it does not create an "unacceptable risk of harm to others." Just because "homosexual conduct is (allegedly) immoral or because it would (allegedly) place a stamp of approval on homosexuality" is no reason to ban it. As of the time of this writing nine states have legalized gay marriage, and 31 states have constitutional amendments which ban gay marriage to some extent -- a fact alone However, society's consciousness matured and grew in understanding of what a loving community is, and came to realize that to exclude other human beings based on prejudice is not God's love, but rather fear and ignorance (Conan).
Conclusion As Rajczi has asserted, if opposite-sex marriage is allowed, then marriage between same-sex partners should be allowed as well, since allowing same-sex marriage harms no one.
The couples were "largely seen but not heard" Moscowitz asserted, adding (p. "Continued engagement into such practices more often than not lead to desire to attain psychosocial satisfaction through intense urge to achieve a feeling of love and sense of belonging" (Abraham Maslow - Hierarchy of Needs).
37) that more research needs to be conducted into exactly how "the debate is constructed across a wider array of news sources that reach different audience" (p. A populist argument in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage Alex Rajczi, a philosophy professor from Claremont -- Mc Kenna College has written a passionate populist piece arguing in favor of same-sex marriage in the journal the Monist. 475) that the "basic principle of our society is that the government must offer all opportunities equally unless there is some good reason to do otherwise." An example is a driver's license -- anyone of proper age can have one "unless there is good reason to do otherwise" (Rajzci, p. He goes on to assert that the government doesn't withhold opportunities "on the ground that people or their (lawful) behaviors are immoral." For example, even if the majority of people agree that sex outside of marriage is immoral -- and even if they are correct about that issue -- it would be "wrong to withhold driver's licenses from those who have had pre-marital or extra-marital sex" (Rajczi, p. What the public and the government do in fact count as a "good reason to withhold an opportunity" is when that person's "receipt of the opportunity would create an unacceptable risk of harm to others" (Rajczi, p. Example: issuing a driver's license to a 13-year-old would create an unacceptable risk to pedestrians and to other drivers. Hence eventually becoming life long partners as depicted in gay marriages, but marriage is defined Homosexual Marriage and the Impacts on Parenting Homosexual marriage refers to legal matrimony between two individuals of the same gender and it is a phenomenon which has come under a great deal of scrutiny and debate during the last few years.
He divides the community into two groups: integrationists and liberationists. On the other hand, the liberationists cherish their gay culture with their own customs and values.
The controversy is caused because of these two different philosophical views. The integrationists want gay marriage and the liberationists object to same sex marriage. s belief is to consider the objections of the liberationists. and thereby further confine both straights and gays.?Society is slowing changing and the polls are showing that acceptance of gay marriage is slowing gaining ground, which is a good thing. America is supposed to be a country where civil rights are enjoyed by all people, African-American, Asian-American, Native American, Latinos, Caucasians and others. 8, Allows Gay Marriage in California." Los Angeles Times. A total of 12,419 seconds (about 207 minutes) of total time was carefully reviewed in these 93 news stories on national television. The purpose of this essay is to make an argument for gay marriage as a viable means of expression for society.The analysis was conducted based on three components: the news story; each source cited in the story; and "each gay or lesbian couple" (Moscowitz, p. The findings show that the "debate" in the video clips "was dominated by conventionally 'straight' perspectives." And while gay and lesbian couples and gay rights activists made up "16% and 8.2% respectively," of the sources that were cited in the video reports, political figures commenting on the issue made up 27% of the time, "conservative activists" composed 13.4% of the sources, and the president (Bush) and White House spokespersons were 10% of the sources shown on the video news reports (Moscowitz, p. The president and his representatives, conservatives who are against gay marriage, political and legal analysts, religious leaders "…were allowed more time to speak in news reports on the marriage issues than were gay and lesbian citizens" (Moscowitz, p. Of the gay and lesbian couples that were the focus of the 93 news stories, only "20%" were given the opportunity "to speak at all." In other words, the gays and lesbians in these news stories appeared more as "image bites" than "sound bites" and the couples that were the "dominant visual focus" of the 96 stories "contributed little to the linguistic content of the stories"(Moscowitz, p. Another way of saying what the appearance of the gays and lesbians amounted to was that "they were granted the status of visual ornamentation," Moscowitz explains (p. On the marriage issue, ABC, NBC, and CBS did not "othered" or "exocticized" the couples in "stereotypical ways," the author continues. I will present this argument by using Gay Marriage Gaiety is the practice of bossom love for similar sex and especially between two males or females, bisexual exclusive.A similar situation is prevailing in Columbia, where the law is yet to be passed declaring the legality of same sex marriages.The national courts are exerting pressure on the government to enact such law as soon as possible.Netherlands is the first nation to stop discriminating gay marriages in April 2011.But it required having one member of the couple to be a Dutch national.The civil rights movement in favour of gay marriages can be traced back to the early 70s.When the first gay marriage application was rejected in the United States, the applicant was a law student and took upon to fight for his right.