The second often voiced argument that opposed the same-sex marriage is that, marriage is created for procreation. People think that families should have children, and same-sex marriages will only result an incomplete families, since the homosexual couples cannot give birth to children. However, with the help of nowadays’ technology, homosexuals can still make up a warm family. For examples, some celebrities make use of in-vitro fertilization to become pregnant. Some even find a surrogate mother to do it for them. Even without these technologies, the homos can still find their children through adoption. In America, the divorce rate draws near to fifty percents. Can we still ensure that heterosexual couples equal to a complete family? The answer is definitely not. Furthermore, this principle is unfair to the homosexuals. If we are going to deny same-sex marriage on this principle, then it must include other people as well. A barren women or a sterile male should not be allowed to marry because they are not able to produce children. Are we going to start requiring that the people who want to get marry, to prove they have the ability to reproduce? This would only narrow the definition of marriage to being intender for giving birth to children. Marriage is to recognize the love of two people. But even we are going to apply this principle to society, we should apply to our population as a whole, but not only the homosexuals, because it is unfair and does not respect them. In short, same-sex marriages should be legalized.
Lastly, the religious definition also denies the same-sex marriages. The religion regards same-sex marriages as a violation of God’s will, because the Bible said homosexual is a sin and God intended marriage to be between a man and a woman. If a religion chooses not to recognize same-sex unions, that is their choice. Same as an individual, if you are not recognizing same-sex couples, it is your choice too. Personal and religious definitions should be separated from the legal recognition. To explain this, take an example in the America. If a woman in America is engaged in pre-marital sex, contraception or being divorced, she would only be considered to violate the biblical discipline, but she is still allowed to marry under the legal definition in the country. This should also be applied to the same-sex marriages. Although same-sex marriages is not allowed in the view of religion, but religious definition does not mean anything, there are still many factors to be considered on whether the same-sex marriages should be legalized or not. The same-sex couples also want the same rights enjoyed by the heterosexual couples. Like the social security benefits, the rights of joint-tax returns and also many other benefits. If you are married heterosexual couples, how does the legalization of same-sex marriages threaten your marriage? Certainly, it doesn’t affect or harm you at all.
In summarization, there are no points that same-sex marriages should not be legalized. Homosexual couples are no different with us, therefore, they should also enjoy the same freedom and rights that we have.
