Only an insightful analysis can offer a logical conclusion on the controversial topic of same-sex marriage. Such a profound analysis of the arguments in favor of as well as those against the practice of same-sex marriage would confirm the social obligation to give room for the rights of the people who prefer the practice. Whereas the arguments against same-sex marriage offer one side of the question, they may often fail even to recognize the existence of the opposite side which convincingly holds the rights of the people for privacy and personal freedom. While admitting the significance of marriage as a social institution, several critics in the recent history argue, along with Charlene Gomes, that "the time has come to expand marriage to include same-sex couples." (Gomes, 15) They hold that it is vital to recognize the practice law in order to defend the emotional and economic welfare of same-sex couples and to offer them an equal plane with heterosexual marriage. In this background, it is most significant to have a thorough understanding of the issues and interests of the same sex couples which in turn substantiates the demand for same-sex marriage on the basis of the theories of equality.
The arguments leveled against the practice of same-sex marriage are various and the arguments based on social, rational, ethical or moral, and religious principles distinctly denounce the practice. In one of the notable essays on the topic, Scott Bidstrup summarizes the major arguments against same-sex marriage and primarily he points out that the institution of marriage has traditionally been between one man and one woman and the same-sex couples do not have a good environment to raise the children. The other major arguments include: the practice is immoral, it would intimidate the institution of marriage, procreation and the continuation of humanity is the objective of marriages, marriages are traditionally a heterosexual institution etc. The list also includes other controversial aspects: "Same-sex marriage is an untried social experiment Same-sex marriage would start us down a 'slippery slope' towards legalized incest, bestial marriage, polygamy and all kinds of other horrible consequences Granting gays the right to marry is a 'special' right" (Bidstrup) While it is significant to have a respect for these arguments, the real motives as well as the base of them is questionable. The arguments against same-sex marriage many often fail to recognize the rights of people for equality and freedom of choice and they always stress on the religious, ethical, and social questions with complete disregard to civil rights of individuals. In fact, the proponents of same-sex marriage are referring to matters of civil justice when they base their arguments on the civil rights issue regardless of life-damaging and life-threatening outcomes of the matter. The torments and pain that the same-sex couple and the advocates of the practice have suffered at the hands of this conservative society are self-explanatory on the question of their civil rights.