Gay Marriage and Adoption - Essay Example

?Introduction Gay marriage is a highly controversial issue in the contemporary society. Homosexuality is a topic, which raises emotions across various quarters such as the Catholic Church as well as the public and conservative politicians, who perceive it as immoral and a distortion to the traditional definition of marriage (BBC, 2012). However, the debate to legalize gay marriage has been going on for a long time, especially in the UK, but not without severe opposition thus making it difficult to reach a compromise. Despite this, it is notable that the country has made tremendous steps towards promoting equality by allowing gay couples to enter into civil partnerships and allowing them to adopt children. The major problem in the country is that the gay community feels that civil partnerships are less valued than marriages and therefore, there is need for the government to recognize their unions as marriage (Culley, 2007). However, critics argue that if this is implemented, it will redefine marriage, which according to them, is a union between a man and a woman. This paper is a critical evaluation of gay marriage and adoption in the United Kingdom. Discussion Gay marriage is a marriage which incorporates the unification of persons of the same sex. This is for example a marriage between a man and man or a woman and a woman. In the UK, this type of marriage is not recognized under the common law. Article 12 of the European convention on human rights, which the UK is party to, does not compel European countries to recognize gay marriage as a human right (Culley, 2007). This assertion has been applied in the European court of human rights while resolving disputes involving gay rights. For example, the court ruled out a case, which was presented before it by a French gay couple, Valerie Gas and Nathalie Dubois, who claimed that the denial of adoption rights by the French was discriminatory and against article 12 of the European convention on human rights (Bowater, 2012). However, the British government, with the support of the prime minister, has been consulting rigorously on the possibility of legalizing gay marriages. The ministry concerned with issues of equality in the country has made it clear than no threats or opposition will hamper efforts to ensure that these marriages are allowed by the end of 2015 (BBC, 2012). Currently, the country only recognizes civil partnerships involving same sex couples. It has been argued that this has already given these people more than enough civil liberties and therefore, the debate to legalize gay marriages is a waste of precious time, which could be spent in discussing other important issues affecting this community. However, gay couples feel that the categorization of their relationships as civil partnerships is not enough as this makes them inferior to heterosexual couples (Culley, 2007). They have the right to feel this way owing to the fact that there is a possibility of being treated unfairly whenever they indicate their marital status, for example in documents while seeking employment. Some of these documents have blank spaces in which one is supposed to fill whether he is married or in a civil partnership. This may have a direct impact on the decisions of the recruiting officers, who may be homophobic. Despite the fact that UK laws prohibit such discrimination, it may be difficult to prove that the reason a person was not hired was due to his or her sexual orientation. This may be worse in the private sector, where hiring processes are not closely monitored by government instruments. Recognizing gay marriage will definitely remove this obstacle thereby resulting to a situation where an interviewee will only be required to state whether he is single or married. The law prohibits calling out people to identify their sexual orientation and therefore, it will be easy for victims to know what law to cite when defending their accusations (Hicks, 2008). Marriage is a union, which is founded on love and synchronization of bodily needs and desires. The move by some of the politicians to rally for legalization of gay marriages will ensure that these communities are respected in the society on the basis of their feelings towards each other and not socially constructed morals that are discriminatory. Continuing to oppose these marriages will only subject gay couples to unwarranted discrimination as a result of the negative perceptions that the greater society has for them. Furthermore, doing so will not help to change their sexual orientation especially since civil partnership is recognized in the country. Religious groupings have a great role and influence in the society, which must be utilized with caution. It is unethical for the church, for example, to continue imposing its conservative doctrines, which do not respect the rich diversity in the society. The government is there to serve all citizens, whether they are believers or not and therefore, the influence by the church should not act as a sole reference point while making significant decisions that touch on individual freedoms. The state governs through secular laws and these are different from religious laws. As such, the state should not be used as a tool to further discriminative religious ideologies. Freedom of religion and expression allows the church discretion on whether to preside over gay marriages or not, without necessarily having to suffer consequences. However, whenever the state is called to offer this service, all the necessary assistance should be provided. The Catholic Church has been highly opposed to the sanctification of gay marriages owing to its perception that doing so will redefine the institution of marriage. In March 2012, one of the Scotland’s Catholic Church cardinals, O’Brien, made a strong statement in which he said that the plan by the government to legalize gay marriage by 2015 is bound to “bring shame on the UK in the eyes of the world” (BBC, 2012). It may not occur to him that the world itself is advancing at a momentous pace and democratic nations such as the US, among others, have already conceded to the demand to recognize gay marriages. Some states in the US such as Washington and Maryland have already succumbed to pressure from the Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) society to legalize gay marriages (Sullivan, 2004). Furthermore, the UK is a democratic country and citizens’ interests come before those of the international community, regardless of the fact that there is no international treaty signed between UK and any other country to suppress gay marriages. The argument by the cardinal therefore lacks sufficient merit to warrant attention from the government. Similarly, senior catholic leaders in the UK have gone to the extent of circulating letters to the more than 2000 churches in the country, trying to convince the faithful to oppose the government’s plan on the basis that such implementation will reduce the significance of marriage, which is primarily to facilitate procreation and bringing up of children (BBC, 2012). A campaign of such magnitude will definitely contribute to negative emotions such as hatred towards the gay community and this cannot be tolerated in a civilized society. Citizens must learn to coexist irrespective of their social, religious or political inclinations as they need each other in order to facilitate uniform development in the country. To some extent, such a strategy by the church may qualify to be categorized as hate speech, as it has the capacity to promote segregation along sexual orientation. The Religious and Hatred Act of 2006 prohibits the circulation of texts or any other material whose contents may have the capacity to trigger hard feelings against a person or group of persons perceived to be non believers (Goodall, 2007). Gay persons are normal human beings as their actions are neither due to lack of sanity nor deliberate lack of morals. They are just but a minority group consisting of people trying to establish their significance in a society that is highly prejudiced. In fact, the UK declassified homosexuality as illness in 1968 and therefore, gay people should be treated as people of sound mind and capable of making independent and rational decisions. The issue of children is a matter, which has continued to be used by critics to discredit gay couples. To begin with, it is argued that marriage was meant for people to procreate, which is not possible for gay couples. It has also been argued that gay couples are a bad influence to the society and therefore, they should not be allowed to marry or adopt children. However, the UK laws have been considerate enough to allow these people the right to adopt children, which is as from 2005 (Brodzinsky, 2011). Critics in this debate fail to understand that gay adoption is a blessing to the society and those numerous children whose survival and future are dependent on well wishers such as children homes. Every child deserves a decent life, which is secure and there is no way this can be found in homes that care for destitute children. This is mainly because most of these homes only accommodate these children for a limited period of time, i.e. until they are 18 years, after which they are compelled to join the society in order to allow space for new entrants. A child, who does not have a family or inheritance to rely on, will always find it difficult to survive especially in these difficult times, when job scarcity is a harsh reality. These children are definitely as a result of poor management in heterosexual marriages as well as fornication and prostitution, which are rampant in the society. It is ironic that the church has been in the forefront, worldwide, to oppose any attempts to legalize abortion and promotion of contraceptives as way of controlling unplanned pregnancies, claiming that it is immoral. The reality on the ground is that accidental pregnancies will continue occurring, whether the laws are enacted or not in addition to the fact that children will continue to be orphaned as a result of parents dying. It is equally inhuman to let these children lavish in poverty and seclusion just because the society is determined to ensure that traditional family definition remains intact. As along as gay couples are willing and capable of offering social and economic protection to these children, then, it is the role of every concerned individual to support such initiative (Hicks, 2008). The assertion by critics that gay couples are incapable of bringing up children with desired morals as opposed to heterosexual couples is highly biased. It may be true to say that a child needs to have a fatherly figure as well as a motherly figure while growing up. However, this requirement is of no sense to a child living in a children home, where the attention of caretakers is minimal as a result of high populations of children demanding attention. In heterosexual adoptions, children may have to deal with competition for attention especially if the couple has its own children. This may result to constant conflicts especially in adult life when the need to share inheritance arises based on the fact that it is natural for someone to feel more entitled to property owned by his or her biological parents. On the other hand, children adopted by gay couples have equal attention from both parents as there are no biological ties, which may promote biasness (Brodzinsky, 2011). Furthermore, it is important to consider the fact that gay couples are a minority group, which has fought a long battle to free itself from oppression and discrimination. Equally, children without caring parents live a disadvantaged life full of misfortunes and discrimination by the general public. In this context, both groups have a better understanding of what it means to be a minority in the society and therefore, it is easier for them to bond than in the case of poor children adopted by rich heterosexual couples (Hicks, 2008). Conclusion Gay marriage is a controversial issue in the contemporary society, UK included. However, unlike other societies such as the US, where gay rights are subject to the discretion of individual states, the UK has uniform laws that protect these rights at a national level. Gay couples, for example, are protected from discrimination in the work place. They are also allowed to adopt children, among other basic rights, which are accorded to heterosexual couples. However, gay marriage is not recognized by the UK laws but on the other hand, civil partnerships are. The government is determined to finalize the process of legalizing gay marriage by 2015 but this intention has been met with hostility from the church and conservative politicians. The Catholic Church, for example, has been engaging in campaigns to convince the faithful not to support such an initiative as it will redefine marriage and in the process, marriage will lack significance. Legalizing gay marriage will expand the rights of the gay couples as it will create a foundation for their acceptance in the society in addition to the fact that it will reduce loopholes that facilitate discrimination. Bibliography BBC (2012). ‘Gay marriage: Roman Catholic archbishops step up fight.’ BBC [Online]. Available at (Accessed: 7 April 2012) Bowater, D. (2012). ‘Gay marriage is not a human right, according to European ruling.’ [Online] Available at (Accessed: 7 April 2012) Brodzinsky, D. (2011). Adoption by Lesbians and Gay Men: A New Dimension in Family Diversity. Oxford University Press Culley, E. (2007). ‘Justified Discrimination? A Critical Analysis of the Decision in Wilkinson v Kitzinger.’ Journal of Undergraduate Research [online]. Available at (Accessed: 7 April 2012) Goodall, K. (2007). ‘Incitement to Racial Hatred: All Talk and No Substance.’ Modern Law Review. 70 (1): 85-110 Hicks, S. (2008). Lesbian and Gay Fostering and Adoption. Jessica Kingsley Publishers Sullivan, A. (2004). Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. Vintage Read More