Homosexuals are looking for an alternative way of living with health and happiness. They have changed their image, habits, and tactics. Many would like to be mothers and fathers, and are pushing towards safer sex and monogamy (Gay 90’s). A common misunderstanding is that sex motivates homosexuals. It seems more likely that heterosexuals see marriage more sexually considering that many believe marriage stands for the purpose of procreation. It is important to note that infertile couples are allowed to marry and that our world is already overpopulated, so clearly procreation is presently not a major concern. Homosexuals tend to value integrity, honesty, sharing, caring and loving. In reality, sex plays a minor role in long-term relationships, which many gays are a part of (Gay Marriages). They are loyal to their mates and are monogamous, devoted partners. Gays are friends, family, neighbours, and coworkers that are committed and contributing members of society as much as the next individual (Bidstrup). The legalization of same-sex marriage might help increase acceptance of gay and lesbian relationships and break down stereotypes (Steirs 72). One must address the question of how much does allowing these friends, family, neighbours and co-workers to express their love for one another hurt heterosexuals? Surely not as much as it continues to hurt gays.
Government was established “to ensure that powerless minorities are still protected from the tyranny of the majority” (Bidstrup), yet it is amazing how many benefits are still withheld from minorities such as homosexuals. Governments are intended to “legislate legal consequences for marriage to protect a vulnerable partner and any children - mostly to ensure that they are adequately cared for on the death of one partner or if the relationship breaks down” (Department). Homosexual couples wish to have their marriage passed through legislation so that they are regarded equally with heterosexual couples. Equality: nothing more, nothing less (Gay 90’s). Civil marriage is a source of social recognition, support, benefits, and implicit responsibilities. Not only do gays want to benefit from the bond of marriage, but also from the rights that follow, which provide safeguards for the poor, less educated, and otherwise vulnerable. Married couples benefit from cheaper life insurance, estate tax benefits, and many rights including parenting, immigration, hospital visitation, and decision-making rights and the right not to testify against one another. Often people feel that gays are searching only for rights and privileges. The majority of homosexuals state that they want “the licenses, the vows, the rings, the honeymoon, the anniversaries, the benefits, and yes, the responsibilities and the routines” (Rauch).
Although many people are sympathetic to homosexuals, some still say, “give them some of the legal prerogatives of spousehood, enroll same-sex partners in the company health-plan, attend their commitment ceremonies, let them register at city hall as partners, just don’t call it marriage” (Rauch). Having separate civil unions that provide the same rights and privileges of married couples is a big step but it still defines gays as second-class (Moore). On the other hand, others do not think that the law should change for such a small percentage of the population. They feel that marriage and families would be doomed because same-sex marriage would “start us down a slippery slope towards legalized incest, bestial marriage, polygamy and all kinds of other horrible consequences” (Bidstrup). But, heterosexual marriage is not necessarily a recipe for success either; after all, half of all marriages end in divorce (Vincent). Gays do not have marriage roles to live up to; perhaps they can do a better job. There is no good reason to believe that “restricting marriage to heterosexuals would resuscitate an institution whose problems are human, not cultural” (Vincent). Society should be more concerned that convicted murderers, child molesters, pedophiles, drug pushers, pimps, and black market gun dealers are free to marry and have children (Bidstrup). Even if we allow gays the rights and responsibilities of marriage but call their union other than “marriage”, society is no better than it was when it had separate institutions for blacks and whites. Today it would be prejudiced and unthinkable to state that a black and a white could not marry, yet at one time, this kind of union was considered “perverted and unnatural” (Moore). Denial of the freedom to marry pushes gay people further away from the rest of society, and affects their sense of self and well being. Children “who are born to or adopted by one member of a same-sex couple deserve the security of two legally recognized parents” (Vanasco). We should be embracing equality for all to put a stop to such exclusion. It is not an option to leave marriage untouched and not have Parliament recognize same-sex relationships as equivalent, despite the desire of religious conservatives (Robinson).
Not only do gays often suffer from job loss, family disapproval, and economic deprival, religion plays an integral role in discrimination against gays (Gay 90’s). Marriage is a sacred institution, and the irrational distaste for homosexuality is a “righteous hate for the sin that cannot help extending to the sinner” (Vincent). Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. Yet it is important to first realize that although not all religions oppose homosexuality, there still remains a surprising amount of discrimination in the church. Some individuals and groups, due to their religious beliefs, have extreme hate for gays and lesbians. Hate crimes are present in communities all over the world. Many entirely believe their sacred texts, and feel that passages in Genesis, Hebrew Scriptures and in the Christian scriptures condemn all forms of homosexual behaviours, even within committed relationships (Robinson).
Although the Bible appears to condemn homosexuality, there are many examples within the Bible that show this may not be completely the case. Conservative and liberal Christians interpret the Bible very differently. Homosexuality is no exception to this distinct and contradicting sets of beliefs (Robinson). Conservative Christians generally believe that the Bible was written by those “directly inspired by God”, and therefore, the writings can have no error. Liberal Christians generally believe that the Bible was written by those who wanted to promote their own spiritual beliefs. Many liberals promote same-sex marriage, and civil unions in the church, for example. They see them as fundamental human rights issues. One thing is for certain. The Bible was written in a pre-scientific age: an age where authors could not have been aware of the scientific study of sexual orientation (Robinson). The fact is that people’s beliefs are rigid and it is extremely difficult to change them.
Many believe that every young man should marry and become a father and every young woman should marry and become a mother, and if that is not done, there has been a violation of the Judeo-Christian tradition. These conservatives believe that homosexuality is a serious sin, and that allowing gay relationships to be recognized by the church would lower church standards and would be a drastic and unacceptable change (Robinson). To recover from Bible abuse, certain steps must be taken. Certain denominations offer marriage ceremonies for gay marriages. Even though these ceremonies are not very common, homosexuals are able to formalize their relationship in the eyes of God. If it is good enough for God, shouldn’t it be good enough for the rest of society? Even if people cannot come to terms with this question, everyone must remember that religion has no standing under law (Bidstrup), and the law certainly should have no place in the bedrooms of the nation.
This issue of gay marriage important because Canada prides itself on equal rights. Violating freedom of expression, equality rights for minorities, and freedom of religion through prohibiting same-sex marriage is without a doubt discrimination. Legalizing same-sex marriage would shape the future direction of the family as an institution, and denial of this basic human right would prove that Canadian society still has a great deal of progress to make. Marriages succeed, or fail, for lack of love and understanding, not because of the sex of the spouses. Homosexuals should be able to test the waters of marriage, because they too have the same capacity to love.
WORKS CITED
Bidstrup, Scott. Veritas et Ratio; Truth and Reason. 28 September 2002.
<http://www.bidstrup.com> (4 November 2002).
Burr, Chandler. “Why Conservatives Should Embrace the Gay Gene.” The Weekly
Standard 9 December 1996.
Department of Justice Canada. Marriage and Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Unions.
8 November 2002. <http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/mar> (10 November
2002).
Gay 90’s; sex, power, and influence. Narr. Shriner, Maria. NBC News, First Person.
1993, National Broadcasting Corporation.
Gay Marriages; Shirley Series. Narr. Shirley. CTV Television Network Ltd. 1993.
Moore, Leah. Points in Defense of Gay Marriage. 21 April 2001.
<http://www.angelfire.com/home/leah> (3 November 2002).
Rauch, Jonathan. “Anything but Marriage?” The Atlantic Monthly May 2002.
Robinson, B.A. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. 9 November, 2002.
<http://www.religioustolerance.org> (10 November 2002).
Stiers, Gretchen A. From This Day Forward. Commitment, Marriage, and Family in
Lesbian and Gay Relationships. St. Martins Press: New York. 1999.
Tessina, Tina. Gay Relationships for Men and Women, Los Angeles: Jeremy P.
Tarcher, Inc,1989.
Vanasco, Jennifer. “Families United in Law”. Chicago Free Press 13 February 2002.
Vincent, Norah. “A lot of Hooey on Same-Sex Marriage; Gays Didn’t Wreck Marriage”.
Los Angeles Times 9 August 2001.
