Marriage is humanity’s version of love written in a legally binding document. Typically when you think of a happy marriage you envision a woman and man exchanging vows of eternal love and support in a church. However, as time has passed homosexuality that was once seen as a“curse” or “affliction” that needs to be driven out has waned by extreme measures, and gay couples’s petition for the right to marry and have their love recognized by the government. Coming from a family with two lesbian sisters and a strong heterosexual father who is a Christian; I’ve seen arguments from both sides and still find that same-sex marriages should be allowed. Same sex marriages should be allowed for the following reasons: gay couples should have the same rights as straight couples, it goes against their constitutional rights as American citizens, and it would bring in revenue for the government.
The slogan “Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve,” is used by most heterosexuals who protest homosexuality, calling it “unnatural” and shudder at the idea of gay marriage. “There are both modern and ancient examples of family arrangements that were, or are based on polygamy, communal child-rearing, the use of concubines and mistresses and the commonality of prostitution, heterosexual monogamy can be considered "unnatural” in evolutionary terms” (Should Marriage Be Legal). This statement debunks arguments against gay marriage who claim that it is not a “traditional marriage,” because not even heterosexual marriages today represent the traditional ways. Another anti-homosexual is Peter S. Sprigg, MDiv, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council had the following to say about same sex marriage: “Marriage is a public institution because it brings together men and women for the reproduction of the human race, and keeps them together to raise the children produced by their union” (Should Gay Marriage Be Legal). Based off of Sprigg’s comment that would mean that couples who have no chance of producing a child should not get married either. If someone against same sex marriage were to read my statement they would say that is not true, but since this is a common argument for them wouldn’t that be true, since a woman or male who is incapable of conceiving a child with their lover wouldn’t be beneficial to their idea that marriage is simply for the reproduction of the human race. Many anti-homosexuals who are deterrents to same-sex marriage would lessen the institution of marriage down to an emotionless reproductive cycle of necessity rather than marrying for love. Others may protest saying that marriage is not considered a marriage unless they have biological proof in the form of a child. Unfortunately, these people are quick to forget there are many heterosexual couples that are unable to produce a child.
If someone told you that you couldn’t get married to the man or the woman you love, because you were infertile wouldn’t you be furious, even...