So I need some reasons why same sex marriage shouldn't be legalized. As of now only 1 state allows it and thats Massachusetts, other states do recognize same sex marriage but only 1 actually does it. So if your against same sex marriage please tell me why and explain. I know religion is a big part but what are some other strong arguments, Thank you
edit:
Topic:
Same Sex Marriage
Argument:
Against Same Sex Marriage
Points Against:
1. May lead to marriages to other things in society
-The most bullsh.t answer ever. It's easy to draw the line between adult, consensual marriage and a man marrying a 12 year old girl or a man marrying a dog. This has been brought up so many times in debates and always shot down as a half-hearted attempt at masked bigotry. Please, delete this from your post; I'm losing respect for you as quickly as you should be losing your dignity.
2. Children need a Father and mother to survive
-As you stated in you post, there is a 50% divorce rate in America. That is the most untrue statement I've ever heard. People live with a father only, a mother only, and even with grandparents, uncles, aunts, or as orphans. It won't take the homosexual minority to demean the value of marriage; you did that yourselves. It is completely ludicrous to claim that children "need a mother AND father to survive" when 50% of marriages end in divorce and single-parent households. My mother, for instance, raised five children on her own and, well, none of us are dead. Your statement is absolutely, 100% insane.
3. In nature it takes a man and a woman to make a baby so by nature gay marriage isn’t fit
-I don't see the correlation between unnatural and unfit, assuming that homosexuality is "unnatural". Maybe unconventional at best, but that's merely borrowing terminology from right-wing bigots and makes no direct link between makin' babies and making a commitment to marriage. I simply fail to see where something being "unnatural" deems it "unfit" in an aspect of life under a completely different for of scrutinization.
4. Gay marriage is considered a sin in some religions
-There are many things in the Bible considered sins that aren't outlawed. Under the eyes of your God, everyone is a sinner. Sin is natural and it has never been a goal of the American government to "outlaw sin". Separation of Church and State. I don't think I need to say any more.
5. Gay marriage is a tradition
-I'm assuming you meant either "heterosexual marriage is a tradition" or "gay marriage is not a tradition". However, when the tradition reeks of prejudice and hatred, why would rectifying the long-standing tradition of heterosexual-only marriage to include, and rightfully so, the homosexual minority, be incorrect?
6. Gay marriage will decrease the economy
-WHAT. THE. f..k.
3 Main Points Against:
1. May lead to marriages to other things in society
2. In nature it takes a man and a woman to make a baby so by nature gay marriage isn’t natural
3. The economy will suffer
Discussions:
*May lead to marriages to other things in society
i. Same sex marriage would be an opening to other types of marriages such as bestial, where a man or woman would marry an animal. People who want to commit bestial marriages would push to get it legalized as same sex marriage is getting pushed to be legalized. This as a society is not a very intelligent thing because it would lead to the downfall of the American society as we know it today.
-Really? Seriously? I had an ounce of respect for this argument beforehand but now, I don't even know how to respond to that. How does a male-male/female-female marriage equate to a male-dog marriage. Give me a f..king break. Bestial marriages (I can't believe I'm really typing this..) would be "rectified" under completely difference circumstances than gay marriages. For instance, the rights of dogs are not guaranteed under the Constitution, such as that of ALL American citizens. And I just typed a paragraph differentiating between gay marriages and bestial marriage. I don't even have anything to say to that..
ii. Gay rights activists claim that these marriages should be allowed because it doesn't hurt anyone, but it could start a chain reaction that destroys the whole idea of marriage. If someone wants to marry his dog, why shouldn't he be able to? What if someone wants to marry their brother or parent? What if someone wants to marry their blow-up doll or have 10 wives? Unless we develop some firm definition of what a marriage is, the options are endless. If these options sound absurd, remember that all it takes is a few activist judges to use the statute to open the door. It doesn't matter if 95 percent of the population disagrees with the policy; one judge can interpret the case the way he or she wants and use the doctrine of stare decisis to impose a law on everyone. Do you remember how two judges in California recently declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional? If the decision hadn't been overturned, it would have prevented millions of children from being able to say the pledge every morning, despite the fact that 95+ percent of Americans disagreed with the decision.
-Your "firm definition of what marriage is": A legal commitment between two non-related humans. How's that? Why is love so hard to understand?
Children need a father and mother to survive
i. In today’s society a child is usually raised by its mother and father. Promoting gay couples and marriages would help increase the adoption rate for kids who are being adopted by gay couples. As the rate of adoption by a gay couple increases, the children of tomorrow will lack the traits of both male and female parents, thus creating a tremendous decline in society. In nature it is natural for a child to acquire these traits to survive and better there knowledge of human life.
-The first sentence of that drips with deceit. How can there be a 50% divorce rate and children "usually" raised by a mother and father? "Usual" denotes a majority, and less that 50% cannot be a majority. And what is this talk about acquiring traits? That's, simply put, four lines of complete bullsh.t.
ii. Most states allow single gays and lesbians to adopt children, but only 11 out of the 50 states actually allow two same-sex parents to adopt. This showing that it is not supported to be a healthy stature for the children.
-Okay, I see no correlation. What the majority deems "correct" is not necessarilly what is correct. Nothing about court rulings decides what's "healthy" or not. That statement is 100%, pure insanity.
*In nature it takes a man and a woman to make a baby so by nature gay marriage isn’t natural
i. As proven as a fact it takes a both male and female to make a child. So by complete and absolute nature it is not fit at all for a man and a man or a woman and a woman to have a child of their own. Gay marriage then gets described as not natural and wrong due to the facts of needing a female and male to have a child.
-There are enough broken homes (50% to be exact. Your numbers.) and wouldn't two married men or women be another loving home in a world where that's a shrinking minority? Wouldn't two loving parents raise a child in a loving manner, something that this nation apparently has recently shown a lack in?
ii. This argument, often encoded in the very name of sodomy statutes ("crime against nature"), betrays a considerable ignorance of behavior in the animal kingdom. The fact is that among the approximately 1500 animal species whose behavior has been extensively studied, homosexual behavior in animals has been described in at least 450 of those species. It runs the gamut, too, ranging from occasional displays of affection to life-long pair bonding including sex and even adopting and raising orphans, going so far as the rejection by force of potential heterosexual partners, even when in heat. The reality is that it is so common that it begs an explanation, and socio-biologists have proposed a wide variety of explanations to account for it. The fact that it is so common also means that it clearly has evolutionary significance, which applies as much to humans as it does to other animal species.
Gay marriage is considered a sin in some religions
i. In many religions today gay marriage is considered a sin and a disease. People who are gay are sinners who need redemption from Jesus Christ. So as a religion stand point it is not acceptable to the society to marry a man and a woman.
-Ugh, that paragraph oozes with ignorance, single-mindednes, and frankly, stupidity. I'm assuming you meant "to marry two men". Frankly, everyone is a sinner but that doesn't stop the nation from condoning adultery as simply taboo. And hell, that's a Commandment! Point me to where there is a Commandment against homosexuality and I'll be glad to take a gander. Who are you to interpret the Bible and place homosexuality and the top of a list of sins, giving it more credence than the 10 Commandments, which, if I'm not mistaken, God handed down to Moses as the very basis of Christianity? Please, if you're going to bring Christianity into this, follow your Bible whole-heartedly and don't interpret things that you have no clue on how to handle.
ii. Virtually every religion in the world, including the major ones in this country, consider homosexuality unacceptable. It is offensive and a swipe to the religious freedom of the majority to have to recognize a relationship they consider sinful. The legal system in the United States evolved out of the laws contained in the Bible. We shouldn't go even farther to tear down those laws.
-A swipe to your religious freedom? Where is your religious freedom in jeopardy while two men are married? Please rephrase that paragraph so I can properly refute it. For now, I'll dismiss it as simple arrogance.
Gay marriage is against tradition
i. In the world today marriage is a strict tradition between a man and a woman only. Not only would promoting gay marriage corrupt our marriage system but it would break the tradition as followed by many people today.
-It wouldn't only break the "tradition" of hatred in this country, it would liberate the oppressed minority in the United States.
ii. The 50 percent divorce rate has already weakened the definition of marriage. We shouldn't be taking further steps to define what marriage is. A law allowing gay marriage would increase the number of joke or non-serious marriages, such as a couple of friends who want to save on taxes. Marriage is the most sacred institution in this country, and every society considers it the joining of a man and a woman. It makes biological sense since only a man and woman can pro-create.
-Did you just reference I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry? Oh god f..king god.
iii. Studies show that homosexuals, for a variety of reasons, have life expectancies of approximately 20 years less than the general population. Just like a lifestyle of smoking, drinking, etc., unhealthy lifestyles should be discouraged.
-If you're so concerned about that, fight AIDS, not homosexuality.
iv. The building blocks of our society and the thing that makes it strong is the traditional family of man, woman, and children. It is what has sustained us through two world wars, a great depression, and numerous other challenges over the centuries. While friends & lovers come and go, your family is always there. The main reason our culture and values have started to crumble is the weakening of families. Introducing another form of "family" would only make the situation worse.
-The fact is your family isn't always there. Heterosexuals f..ked up marriage on their own; how would homosexuals possibly make it worse? If anything, there would potentially be more happy marriages then there currently are. Don't pin the "weakening of families" on homosexual marriages that haven't even happened.
*Gay marriage will decrease the economy
i. A huge defiance of gay marriage is brought about in the discussion of how our economy would adapt to gay marriage. As gay marriage is not only seen as a disgrace to human society it would actually end up hurting Americans financially. The more gay marriages there are the more in debt the economy will become as along with gay marriages the couples would be entitled to social security as well as tax cuts. Gay marriage is not only making our economy more in debt but it may very well make it fall in a great depression again. Gay marriage can’t be seen as good when it makes others pay more for gay married couple’s benefits.
-You're right. Keep the national debt at however many trillions of dollars it as at the cost of the liberty of an entire minority group. Bush has it right.
ii. How about the impact on Social Security if there are millions of new dependents that will be entitled to survivor benefits? It will amount to billions of dollars on an already overburdened system. And how about the cost to American businesses? Unproductive costs mean fewer jobs for those who need them. Are state and municipal governments to be required to raise taxes substantially to provide health insurance and other benefits to millions of new "spouses and other dependents"?
-Social Security? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Sources:
http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/marriage.htm http://www.balancedpolitics.org/same_sex_marriages.htm http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm http://www.nogaymarriage.com/tenarguments.asp http://carnap.umd.edu/queer/marriagenotes.htm