Gay Marriages Summary: Should homosexual couples be allowed to marry?

print this page Discuss topic Introduction Author: Eliot Jones ( Tunisia ) Eliot Jones is a freelance communications consultant. Created: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 Last Modified: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 Context There is now an increasingly tolerant attitude towards homosexuality in society, especially in the West. However, the treatment of homosexuals differ from one country to another. In some nations, homosexuality is illegal whilst in others, homosexuals are now accorded an increasing catalogue of rights that have been enjoyed by heterosexuals all along. In the UK for instance, by virtue of a recent ruling of the European Court of Human Rights in Lustig-Prean and Beckett v UK, gays can now serve in the Armed Forces. Any measures that discriminate against them from doing so due to their sexual orientation is now unlawful. However, gays have yet to attain complete equality of status in the eyes of the law. Should the rights accorded to gays be extended to the right to get married? Arguments Pros Cons

One of the last bastions of discrimination against gays lies in the fact that gay couples in many countries are at present not allowed to marry. Such discrimination should be eradicated by permitting gay couples to marry as a means of professing their love to each other. The contemporary views of society ought to change with the times. Whilst discrimination in general should be abhorred, some forms of discrimination can be objectively justified. Marriage has always been viewed by society as the religious and/or civil union between a man and a woman, and has always been regarded primarily as a heterosexual institution. To allow gay couples to marry would enable them to take advantage of the various fiscal benefits accorded to married couples in general. Many of the fiscal benefits

enjoyed by married couples (e.g. child support payments) are not geared towards encouraging marriages in itself, but to promote the existence of the conventional family. Religious attitudes should be modified to reflect the changes in society. Many religious views are outdated and no longer justifiable (e.g. the notion that women play a subservient role to men in the world). Conversely, gay couples should be allowed the option to undergo civil marriages; this does not entail any religious ceremonies and ought to be acceptable to those who object to gay marriages on the grounds of their religious beliefs. Marriage is historically a religious institution. As most of the major religions in the world (e.g. Christianity, Islam and Judaism) frown upon homosexuality itself, it would thus be unacceptable to extend the right to marry to gay couples. It is inaccurate to perceive marriage merely as an institution for child-raising purposes. There are many married couples in society today who do not have children of their own. Similarly, there are an increasing number of children who are raised by single parents these days. In any case, gay couples may adopt children in countries where they are permitted to do so. The advance of medical science has also enabled gay couples to have children of their own through surrogate mothers. Marriage is historically regarded as the main means to foster the creation of a conducive environment in which children can be brought up. As gay couples are unlikely to have children, there is no real necessity for the right to marry to be extended to them. An alternative to marriage is the registration of the union of gay couples. However, any proposed alternative to marriage itself would be unacceptable as registered gay couples would still not enjoy completely equal rights as married heterosexual couples in society. Moreover, this would also fuel the idea that registered gay couples enjoy an inferior status to married heterosexual couples, thereby giving rise to discrimination all over again. Also known as the love contract, the registration of the union of gay couples has been carried out successfully in countries such as Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium and Spain. This would be an avenue for gay couples to declare their union to the world. The practice in countries which implement this system is to allow registered couples to be entitled to joint insurance coverage and to allow them to file for joint tax returns as well as inheritance and tenants rights. On the other hand, such a proposal makes no incursions into the sanctity of the institution of marriage itself, thereby proving acceptable to the religious sections of society. Motions This House would allow gay couples to marry This House would give homosexuals equal rights This House believes that discrimination can never be justified