Human Rights and Same-Sex Marriage - Essay Example

Human Rights and Same-Sex Marriage Introduction To claim that denying the legalization of same sex marriage is a violation of human rights, one must first prove that same-sex marriage is one of the rights protected by the Constitution. This paper aims to correct the presumption that same-sex marriages should be legalized because every individual has the constitutional right to marry. The truth is, marriage by its vary nature, is heterosexual, thus, policies limiting marriage to the union between one man and one woman do not violate the Equal Protection Clause or any other legal or moral principle (Stacey 27). Laws regarding marriage should ensure the continuation of the species, not protect the emotional wants of individuals. Simply put, there is no right to same-sex marriage, thus, homosexuals are not being denied their right. In fact, if one looks at the right of a child to be raised by both biological parents, the right of a man to be ensured of paternity, and the right of a woman to be with her child (Stacey 27) one sees that, not legalizing same-sex marriage protects many natural rights. It Is Not Included in One’s Civil Rights Those who argue that same-sex marriages should be considered a civil right and should be treated just like any heterosexual monogamous marriage are doing so based on the principle of the Equal Protection Clause. This is, however, a flawed argument. It is absolutely wrong to consider that one’s constitutional rights ensure equal treatment in the area of marriage. One must understand with regard to equal treatment, the Constitution does not make reference to social relationships such as families, marriages, friendships, and the like (McVeigh and Maria-Elena 899). Two friends, who decide to consider their relationship a marriage, cannot go to the courts and demand equal protection rights just because they decided to consider their friendship a marriage. To do so is tantamount to saying that just because some people at a certain sports event pray together before the start of the event; courts are required under the equal protection law to allow these sports event goers to redefine the event as a religious ceremony. Social Reality Cannot Be Declared by the Constitution The government, as an example, recognizes a relationship between two contracting parties, one of whom agrees to mow the other’s lawn. However, the law governing the contracts does not define beforehand what kinds of contracts can be drawn. The law, instead, merely makes clear how binding a consensual contract is, and what legal obligations both agreeing parties have in fulfilling the contract. The law also clarifies the consequences should one or both parties breach stipulations in the contract (Bily 33). The role of the law is limited only to overseeing the relationship. It does not create the relationship. If applied in the argument of same-sex marriage, this means that, for several centuries already, marriage laws have considered marriage under the classification of a bond between a man and a woman that normally leads to procreation (Bily 48). Same-sex relationships simply cannot fall under this category. Same-Sex Marriage is Out of the Scope of Laws The argument is over whether same-sex relationships can fit within the definition of marriage (Pan, Meng, and Zhou 636). Once same-sex relationships are identified as fitting this structure, only then can people demand civil rights and equal protection treatment in reference to marriage. One of the common arguments of advocates for legalizing same-sex marriage is that such relationships are like marriage in several aspects, particularly in living together, romantic emotions, sexual acts, and other forms of intimacy. This is not possible, though, until there is ample practical and uncontestable proof that there is no distinction between marriage and same-sex relationships. Again, this is a tough feat because, for several centuries already, the structure of marriage has circled the purpose of procreation for the survival of the species (Bily 48 & Pan, Meng, and Zhou 641). Therefore, same-sex relationships cannot be considered indistinguishable from marriage. Marriage should be available to all couples and by denying them the right to marry; we also deny them the benefits of marriage. This also refers to minority discrimination, these minorities must never be suppressed, and they should be allowed to do whatever they feel like. They have a very strong case and denying them is only going to make them contumacious. Gay marriages have never hurt any society and it will never hurt any society, this should be allowed. They never disturb anyone and there shouldn’t be any problem should gays marry each other. Love is the biggest element that matter in a marriage and of two men love each other, no power in the world should deny them the right to marry each other. It is beyond reasoning to stop them from marrying each other. The high risk sexual lifestyle is also curbed when these marriages take place, people give up high risk sexual lifestyle once they are married. “For too long homosexuality has been considered a form of "deviant sexual behavior". (Balanced Politics) Those making these accusations should examine the history books and the psychological research. Throughout our history going all the way back to ancient Greece, homosexual relationships have existed. The term "lesbian" comes from a Greek island called "Lesbos" where many such couples lived. The meaning of marriage gets completely redefined when two men marry each other and the same has become an issue that has come to the limelight. Gay marriage is a serious threat and it challenges the nature too and this is because two men can never reproduce and take their generation forward. They can adopt a child but they can never fulfill the gap left, that gap can only be fulfilled by a mother. The divorce rates are extremely high when two men or women marry each other and research goes to prove it. Heterosexual divorces are much less than homosexual divorces and this is another reason why people oppose gay marriages. Gay marriages have also come under intense scrutiny with regard to the tradition that the world has been following for many years. When it comes to mental health, it has been found that Gays are much less healthier than normal people and this is because of their genetic makeup, their way of walking, the way they talk differs from normal people and they are different from normal people. Conclusion It can therefore be concluded that same-sex relationships cannot be defined as similar to marriage. This means that not legalizing same-sex marriage does not fall under the category of a violation of civil rights. Whether this is a healthy or unhealthy belief is beside the point in terms of legalities. In the first argument, it has been explained that the distinction of universities from churches, friendships from marriage, and the likes have nothing to do with one’s civil rights under the constitution. The second argument shows that the law does not define the type of social relationship, but can only guarantee protection on the already recognized relationships that has been elaborated in the first argument. The third argument further explains that the structure of marriage has long been defined even before the laws came into existence. Therefore, there is no discrimination if an infant is denied the right to enter into marriage precisely because it does not fall under the defined marriage structure, which is in turn protected by the law. Same-sex relationships and marriage are entirely distinct relationships, and there should be no issue if the prior does not obtain the same protection as the latter under the law (Stacey 35). Works Cited Balanced Politics (2013). Web. Retrieved from: Stacey, Judith. "Gay Parenthood and the Decline of Paternity As We Knew It." Sexualities. 9.1 (2006): 27-55. Print. McVeigh, Rory, and D D. Maria-Elena. "Voting to Ban Same-Sex Marriage: Interests, Values, and Communities." American Sociological Review. 74.6 (2009): 891-915. Print. Bily, Cynthia A. Homosexuality: Opposing Viewpoints. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Print. Pan, Po-Lin, Juan Meng, and Shuhua Zhou. "Morality or Equality? Ideological Framing in News Coverage of Gay Marriage Legitimization." The Social Science Journal. 47.3 (2010): 630-645. Print. Read More