Argumentrix is a wiki of claims and rebuttals

Please do not discuss your opinions; no one should know what you believe. Adopt the site's tone and style: simple, blunt, precise, direct, plain, to-the-point. Include only the absolutely necessary context, and eliminate jargon. Content that is convincing, rhetorical, persuasive, elegant, evocative or embellished may be removed.

Governments should recognize both opposite and same sex marriages

From Argumentrix
Jump to: navigation, search

Governments should recognize both opposite and same sex marriages
Subjects
Marriage
 Government
Heterosexuality
 Homosexuality
Linking arguments
Civil unions are a suitable substitute for marriage for same-sex couples
Governments should restrict adoption to heterosexual couples
The power to recognize same-sex marriages or not is reserved for state governments in the United States



Supporting arguments

Marriage comes with many legal benefits in most or all countries of the world. It is unfair to deny those benefits to those who would engage only in same sex marriage. Because homosexuality and heterosexuality are morally equivalent, a government's refusal to recognize homosexual marriages constitutes discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is morally wrong. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]


Children have better outcomes when their parents are married in a legally binding institution. There are numerous children in need of adoption, and same-sex partners could more easily adopt and raise them in stable, married households if same-sex marriage is legally recognized. [6] [7] [8]


Government recognition of same-sex marriages will result in an increase in the number of homosexuals who live stable, normal lives with monogamous relationships in a healthy family. This is productive and has positive outcomes for society. [9] [10] [11] [12]


Marriage is an important institution, and states should promote it between both opposite sex and same sex couples. Homosexuality and heterosexuality should be treated the same in this regard because they are morally equivalent. [13]


Denying marriage to same-sex couples is morally equivalent to denying marriage to interracial couples, which is nowadays near universally recognised as wrong. [14] [15]


Marriage is a human right, and it should not be denied on the basis of both partners being the same-sex. People have the right to love each other and to legally recognize that commitment. These human rights should not be violated by governments. [16] [17] [18]


The institution of marriage has evolved in recent decades to be motivated primarily by love and attraction, not procreation and homemaking. Part of that change has been to encompass same-sex relationships as marriages in that they are between committed, loving couples; governments should recognize this change by recognizing same-sex marriage. [19]


Governments should recognize marriages between both opposite and same sex couples because neither form harms any third parties, and governments should not infringe on people's private decisions that don't cause harm to others. [20]


Societies should pursue socialism, which requires that homophobia and other forms of injustice be eradicated. As part of this goal, opposite-sex marriages must be recognized by governments. [21]


Children flourish best if they are raised by married parents. Thus, denying marriage to certain parents constitutes discrimination against their children because it results in negative outcomes for them. [22]


Denying marriage to homosexual couples results in stigma, conflict and other negative outcomes for the affected individuals, as well as their children. [23]


The emotional and sexual fulfillment that marriage provides is maximized by each individual marrying others of their preferred gender. Societies should not prevent people from making themselves happy in this way. [24]


Many religions desire to affirm the partnerships of same-sex couples through legally-binding marriage ceremonies. Governmental refusal to allow for this behavior restricts religious expression, which is inherently wrong. [25] [26]


Marriage benefits same-sex couples by granting them legal benefits as well as recognition and solidity for their relationships, which results in better outcomes for them. [27] [28]


Marriage is economically beneficial, generating income for private businesses through tourism and other industries. [29] [30]


It is unreasonable to distinguish on the basis of gender in marriage law because gender is a socially constructed idea, and there are people who blur the lines between the genders. Any line drawn is arbitrary. [31]


Denying marriage to same-sex couples is morally analogous to denying it to people of a certain race, which is usually seen as wrong. [32]


Marriage reduces promiscuity, and therefore lowers the transmission rate for sexually-transmitted diseases. Therefore, government recognition of both opposite and same-sex marriage is beneficial for all of society. [33]


The sale of marriage licenses increases governmental revenue, which is a positive outcome for governments and society in general. [34]


If only opposite-sex marriages are allowed, then men are restricted from exercising a right women have (marrying men) and vice versa, thus constituting sexual discrimination. Thus, restrictions on same-sex marriage violate the principle that both sexes should be treated equally. [35]


Recognizing both opposite and same-sex marriages equally makes a society more attractive for investors because otherwise people whose marriages are not recognized or less valued may be reluctant to move there. Investors will find it easier to invest in places where all of the best employees can feel welcomed. [36]


Refusing to accept same-sex marriages leads some people to feel disenfranchised and disconnected from society. Some of these people engage in economically unproductive pursuits like protesting, and may be less productive members of society than they would be if they had the right to same-sex marriages. [37]


This point applies only in Barbados.
Barbados is a secular country that already grants rights to relationships that are not religiously authorized marriages. It is therefore reasonable to extend actual marriage rights to same-sex couples. [38]


This point applies only in Belize.
The Constitution of Belize necessitates that same-sex couples be given the same right to sexual freedom as opposite-sex couples. [39]


This point applies only in Cambodia.
Cambodia is a liberal democracy, and as such, should recognize the rights of all of its citizens, including homosexuals. Recognizing same-sex marriages is a component of democratic rule. [40] [41]


This point applies only in the Cayman Islands.
The government of the Cayman Islands should not distinguish between different kinds of marriage or marriage-like unions because doing so would be unfair and discriminatory. [42]


This point relies on Christian doctrine.
The Christian Church historically recognized same-sex unions called adelphopoiesis, and such relationships should continue to be recognized today. [43]


This point applies only in Colombia.
The Constitution of Colombia requires that families be given equal rights regardless of the sexual orientation of the parents. To do otherwise would be unfair and discriminatory. [44]


This point applies only in Costa Rica.
The Costa Rican Constitution requires that all citizens be given the same rights, such as marriage. Therefore, the government must recognize both opposite and same-sex couples. [45]


This point applies only in Guatemala.
Guatemalan law grants people the same rights regardless of family status, and so it is vital that marriage rights be extended to opposite-sex couples so that the families of same-sex couples will be treated legally the same as the families of opposite-sex couples. [46]


This point relies on Hindu doctrine.
There is no reason for opposite and same-sex couples to be treated differently regarding marriage according to Hindu beliefs. Homosexuality is morally neutral, and should not affect one's ability to marry. [47]


This point applies only in India.
The people of India are guaranteed an equal right to pursue happiness. The ability to marry the person they love is part of that right. [48]


This point applies only in Israel.
All marriages in Israel are currently performed by religious institutions that do not perform opposite sex marriages. The government should step in and allow for opposite sex couples to wed outside of religious institutions. [49]


This point applies only in Israel.
A majority of Israelis supports governmental recognition of same-sex marriages, and the government should acknowledge this popularity and begin recognizing them. [50]


This point applies only in Kenya.
The Kenyan Constitution forbids governmental recognition of same-sex marriages. [51]


This point applies only in Kuwait.
Homosexuals should be able to pursue happiness just like heterosexuals in Kuwait, but can not because of a national culture that oppresses homosexuals. Governmental recognition of same-sex marriages can help to change that state, resulting in happier lives for Kuwaiti homosexuals. [52]


This point applies only in the Netherlands.
Because of the origin of Dutch culture in the Netherlands' Calvinist heritage, the Dutch people desire rules for every institution, including gay marriage. [53]


This point applies only in Saint Lucia.
Recognizing same-sex marriages would result in Saint Lucia becoming an attractive tourist destination for gay couples, resulting in a healthier and more productive economy. [54]


This point applies only in the United States.
In the United States, the regulation of "marriage" is not a function of the federal government, and is therefore reserved for the states. U. S. states that wish to should recognize same-sex marriage, but the federal government should not. [55]


This point applies only in the United States.
The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of religion. Therefore, the right of religious institutions to extend marriage to same-sex couples can not be infringed upon in the United States. [56]


This point applies only in the United States.
The Fourteenth Amendment requires that states grant "equal protection" under the law. Restricting marriage to heterosexual couples is inequal protection, and therefore violates the Fourteenth Amendment. [57]

Opposing arguments

Most religions oppose same-sex marriages, and are offended by any governmental recognition of them. [58]


The purpose of marriage is to promote proper childrearing, which homosexuals can not do as effectively as heterosexuals. Therefore, governments should not extend marriage to same sex couples. [59]


Marriage is a valuable institution for society, and changing its definition will destroy its worth, rendering it meaningless. [60]


Children have a right to a mother and a father, and it is wrong for society to deliberately deprive any child of their parents. Governmental recognition of same-sex marriages lead to same-sex parenting, with children missing either a mother or a father. [61]


State recognition of same sex marriages will make it easier for gay and lesbian people to adopt children. Being raised by gay and lesbian parents has many deleterious effects on children, and makes them more likely to become homosexual later in life. [62]


It is better for governments to recognize civil unions for same-sex partners because extending marriage to homosexual partnerships is controversial and upsetting to many people. Civil unions are a suitable substitute for marriage for same-sex couples. [63]


The recognition of same-sex marriages is part of a plan by feminist groups to move towards a gender-neutral society. This would be a harmful change, and should be resisted. [64]


Same-sex relationships are shorter and less monogamous than opposite-sex relationships. Recognizing both relationships as "marriage" will transmit these negative values to opposite-sex marriage, resulting in poor outcomes for all people and for society. [65]


Governmental recognition causes emotional harm in most people because it harms the sanctitiy of opposite-sex marriages. [66]


States should not recognize same sex marriages because same-sex partners can not procreate with each other, thus inhibiting the state's ability to promote procreation, which is the primary purpose of marriage. [67]


When governments recognize same-sex marriage, they perform actions that diminish the value of opposite sex marriage. For example, replacing words that convey a sense morality and stability, like "wife" and "father", with generic terms like "spouse" and "parent one". This harms all families. [68] [69]


Governmental recognition of same-sex marriages is morally analogous to slavery, which is almost universally perceived as wrong. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that same-sex marriage is equally wrong. [70]


States should not recognize any kind of marriage. People should assign each other financial or other rights as they see fit, and the government should do nothing more than enforce these contracts like any other. [71]


Government-recognizing same-sex marriages harm everyone involved and their families by diminishing familial roles and harming the institution of family. [72]


Same-sex marriage is unnatural, which makes it immoral. It should therefore not be recognized by governments. [73]


Same-sex sexual behavior is an immoral sexual perversion, and it should therefore not be instititutionalized through government-recognized marriage. [74]


If marriage between same-sex couples is normalized in societies, there will soon be a push to expand marriage to encompass other kinds of partnerships, specifically polygamy, which are morally wrong. [75]


There are many parts of the world where same-sex partnerships are very rare, and in those places, there is no need or demand for same-sex marriage. [76]


All societies everywhere in the world recognize an institution like marriage between procreating couples, for the purpose of extending the legal and social links to the married couple's biological children. [77]


Same-sex marriages and polygamous marriages are morally analagous, and should be treated the same. Since most people in Western societies regard polygamy as inherently wrong, it is vital that same-sex marriage be prohibited so as to prevent any possibility of polygamy being legalized. [78]


Same-sex marriages and zoophilic relationships between people and non-human animals are morally analagous, and should be treated the same. Since most people in Western societies regard bestiality as inherently wrong, it is vital that same-sex marriage be prohibited so as to prevent any possibility of bestiality being legalized. [79]


Governmental recognition of same-sex marriages will result in legal action and social pressure directed towards more and more business, organizations individuals to refrain from discriminating against homosexuals. This would be an unfair outcome because it violates people's right to express their opinion. [80] [81]


The traditional definition of marriage has always universally been between opposite-sex partners. It is therefore contrary to thousands of years of tradition and heritage to recognize same-sex partnerships as "marriages". [82]


Research has shown that people engaged in long-term homosexual partnerships tend to pursue riskier sex practices. State recognition of homosexual marriages will therefore lead to an increase in sexually transmitted diseases and other negative health outcomes. [83] [84]


By recognizing relationships forbidden by Christian doctrine, governmental recognition of same-sex marriage constitutes a harmful attack on Christianity. [85]


By recognizing relationships forbidden by Islamic doctrine, governmental recognition of same-sex marriage constitutes a harmful attack on Islam. [86]


Government-recognized same-sex marriage constitutes governmental promotion of homosexual relationships. Governments should not promote homosexual relationships. [87]


Governments should promote procreation by recognizing only opposite-sex marriages. Recognizing same-sex marriage could reduce procreation, leading to the extinction of humanity. [88]


People are obliged to ensure the continuation of their society by procreating through a heterosexual family. Governments should enforce this directive by recognizing only opposite sex marriages. [89]


Long-term relationships between homosexuals are more likely to result in domestic violence, which is a negative outcome for the participants as well as any children who are a part of the household. [90]


This point applies only in Aruba.
The morality of the Aruban people contravenes opposite-sex marriage, and the government should respect the people's view by refusing to recognize opposite-sex marriages. [91]


This point applies only in Australia.
Australia is a Christian country, founded on Biblical values. Accordingly, same-sex marriages should not be recognized because Christian doctrine rejects them. [92]


This point applies only in the Bahamas.
The Bahamas is a Christian country, and its laws should be based on Christian ideals. Same-sex marriage violates this fundamental notion regarding Bahamian society. [93]


This point relies on Christian doctrine.
The Bible condemns homosexuality, and government recognition of same-sex partnerships would therefore run counter to Biblical precepts. This makes the idea of government-recognized same-sex partnerships immoral because the Bible is a source of moral authority. [94] [95] [96]


This point relies on Christian doctrine.
Marriage is a Christian sacrament and institution, designed to be between one man and one woman. Therefore, governmental recognition of same-sex relationships violates the proper Christian understanding of marriage. [97] [98]


This point applies only in Greece.
Same-sex marriage violates the spirit of the Greek Constitution, which defines marriage as opposite sex. [99]


This point applies only in India.
Same-sex marriages are contrary to Indian culture and tradition, and should therefore not be recognized by government agencies in India. [100]


This point applies only in Israel.
Same-sex marriage is contrary to the Torah, and should not be recognized by Israel out of respect for Jewish teachings. [101]


This point relies on Jain doctrine.
Same-sex marriages are contrary to Jain teachings, and should therefore be prohibited by the state out of respect to the Jain religion. [102]


This point applies only in Jamaica.
Jamaica is a Christian state, and the Christian God is accordingly the final authority on matters of morality. Proper Christian doctrine teaches marriages must only be between a man and a woman, and Jamaican law should continue to respect that by recognizing only opposite-sex marriages. [103]


This point applies only in Mexico.
The culture of Mexico is so thoroughly anti-gay that governmental recognition of same-sex marriage can only inflame homophobic hatred, causing an increase in violence directed at homosexuals. The government should avoid this problem by refusing to recognize same-sex marriages. [104]


This point applies only in Nepal.
Legalized same-sex marriage violates the traditional Hindu conception of marriage and sexuality. Nepal should be governed based on Hindu ideas. [105]


This point applies only in Nigeria.
It violates traditional Nigerian culture for same-sex marriages to be recognized by the government. [106]


This point applies only in Pakistan.
Pakistan is an Islamic state, and same-sex relationships are forbidden in Islam. Pakistan should respect Islam's place by forbidding same-sex marriages. [107]


This point applies only in Peru.
The Peruvian government should base its laws on the natural order of the world. Same-sex marriages, being unnatural, violate that principle [108]


This point applies only in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
The vast majority of the people of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines oppose government-recognized same-sex marriages. The government should respect their view by refusing to recognize them. [109]


This point applies only in Samoa.
Same-sex marriages conflict with Samoan culture and Christian values, and should therefore not be recognized. [110]


This point applies only in Scotland.
Governmental recognition of same-sex marriage violates the Biblical understanding of the Church of Scotland. [111]


This point relies on Sikh doctrine.
Same-sex marriages violate Sikh law, and are contrary to the laws of nature. Therefore, governments should prohibit same-sex marriages to prevent immorality. [112]


This point applies only in Singapore.
Governments should respect their people's view on the issue of same-sex marriage. The Singaporean people remain highly conservative regarding homosexuality, and are not ready for government-approved same-sex marriages. [113]


This point applies only in the United Arab Emirates.
Same-sex marriages are offensive and harmful to Emirati society, and should therefore be not just unrecognized but explicitly banned by the government there. [114]


This point applies only in the United Kingdom.
The United Kingdom is a Christian country and should therefore be governed based on Christian values. [115]


This point applies only in the United Kingdom.
Recognizing same-sex marriage would bring shame to the United Kingdom. [116]


This point applies only in the United Kingdom.
Government-recognized same-sex marriage could lead to a situation where the legal system will force churches and ministers to perform such marriages even though they don't believe in them, violing their freedom of religion. [117]


This point applies only in the United States.
The United States remains a Christian nation, and should continue to use Christianity as a basis for evaluating legal and political options. This does not violate the letter or spirit of the United States Constitution. [118]


This point applies only in the United States.
Federal recognition of same-sex marriages will establish a pattern, under the Fourteenth Amendment, that marriage is a right. This will lead to inevitable court challenges from other parties, such as polygamists, asserting that they have the same right. Same-sex marriage will thus necessitate legalizing these other practices, which are morally objectionable. [119]


This point applies only in the United States.
All people and institutions in the United States are obligated to respect all legally sanctioned marriages. Therefore, government-sanctioned same-sex marriage inhibits the rights of individuals and institutions to not recognize same-sex marriages. [120]


This point applies only in Vanuatu.
Vanuatu is a Christian country, and should be governed on that basis. Accordingly, same-sex marriages must not be recognized. [121]

References

  1. ↑ Gary Johnson
  2. ↑ Robert B. Hanson
  3. ↑ Alliance of Baptists
  4. ↑ Evan Wolfson
  5. ↑ Vidhan Maheshwari
  6. ↑ blackrepub
  7. ↑ Kevin Chang
  8. ↑ C. J. Marshall
  9. ↑ Alex Knepper
  10. ↑ William Saletan
  11. ↑ Le Bach Duong
  12. ↑ David Cameron
  13. ↑ Kevin Chang
  14. ↑ Asinine
  15. ↑ lwlamar
  16. ↑ rudysh
  17. ↑ RationalWiki
  18. ↑ CreepyRuss85
  19. ↑ Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers
  20. ↑ Dulousaci
  21. ↑ Mariela Castro
  22. ↑ C. J. Marshall
  23. ↑ Robert B. Hanson
  24. ↑ RationalWiki
  25. ↑ Douglas Elliott
  26. ↑ Faith in Marriage
  27. ↑ Th4Fire
  28. ↑ ChildlikeJarvis90
  29. ↑ Darin Scherer
  30. ↑ Angelo
  31. ↑ pzanon
  32. ↑ ZachManchesterUK
  33. ↑ Scott Bidstrup
  34. ↑ Darin Scherer
  35. ↑ lem0nade
  36. ↑ Yawning Bread
  37. ↑ larztheloser
  38. ↑ Peter Wickham
  39. ↑ Caleb Orozco
  40. ↑ Norodom Sihanouk
  41. ↑ Popy
  42. ↑ Cayman Islands Human Rights Council
  43. ↑ Josef Pavlovc
  44. ↑ Colombian Constitutional Court
  45. ↑ Abelardo Araya
  46. ↑ Jorge López
  47. ↑ Bodhananda Saraswati
  48. ↑ Vidhan Maheshwari
  49. ↑ Moshe Y'aalon
  50. ↑ Uri Regev
  51. ↑ Raila Odinga
  52. ↑ KuwaitExposed
  53. ↑ Henk Krol
  54. ↑ Botox
  55. ↑ Barack Obama
  56. ↑ BrnVonChknPants
  57. ↑ Quest
  58. ↑ TheBomb
  59. ↑ Vilem Holan
  60. ↑ MapTheMap
  61. ↑ Keith O'Brien
  62. ↑ Paul Cameron
  63. ↑ ConservativeCrusade
  64. ↑ MapTheMap
  65. ↑ Peter Sprigg
  66. ↑ James Hirvisaari
  67. ↑ National Organization for Marriage
  68. ↑ Sean Collins
  69. ↑ TasticBran
  70. ↑ Keith O'Brien
  71. ↑ shoutbits
  72. ↑ DizzyCasey
  73. ↑ jackprague94
  74. ↑ jackowens
  75. ↑ Dpayton
  76. ↑ Cameronl35
  77. ↑ Kdalton
  78. ↑ InquireTruth
  79. ↑ jackowens
  80. ↑ PleaseConvinceMe.com
  81. ↑ Lucia Maria
  82. ↑ abierubin
  83. ↑ Paul Cameron
  84. ↑ Cameronl35
  85. ↑ Lyn Rees
  86. ↑ Council of Glasgow Imams
  87. ↑ WeAreAllBroken
  88. ↑ Robert Mugabe
  89. ↑ Lueth
  90. ↑ Paul Cameron
  91. ↑ Hendrik Croes
  92. ↑ Margaret Court
  93. ↑ Kim Sands
  94. ↑ Richard A. Hunter
  95. ↑ 80 signatories to the Kuala Lumpur Statement
  96. ↑ FundyFundy
  97. ↑ Almyer
  98. ↑ Joseph Harris
  99. ↑ Giorgios Sanidas
  100. ↑ Pragyanand
  101. ↑ Agudath Israel of America
  102. ↑ Acharya Lokesh Muniji
  103. ↑ Ray4rs2000
  104. ↑ Armando Martinez
  105. ↑ Basudev Krishna Shastri
  106. ↑ David Mark
  107. ↑ Khalid Humayun
  108. ↑ Juan Luis Cipriani
  109. ↑ Parnel Campbell
  110. ↑ Tuilaepa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi
  111. ↑ Church of Scotland
  112. ↑ Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti
  113. ↑ James Wang
  114. ↑ Issam Azouri
  115. ↑ MarTMill
  116. ↑ Keith O'Brien
  117. ↑ revian1
  118. ↑ Christian Answers Network
  119. ↑ Mike Volpe
  120. ↑ Brian Brown
  121. ↑ Vaturisu Council of Chiefs
Wiki articles by viewpoint
Neutral wikis Wikipedia: Same-sex marriage
Citizendium (Academic): Homosexuality
Debatepedia (Debates): Debate: Homosexuality 		Viewpoints Wikinfo (Sympathetic): Same-sex marriage
WhyItIsTerrible (Critical): None
Philosophies and topics Atheism Wiki (Atheist): None
FreeThoughtPedia (FreeThought): None
Objectivism Wiki (Objectivist): None
RationalWiki (Skeptic): Homosexuality
WikiSynergy (Conspiracy theories, inclusive): None
EvoWiki (Evolutionary science): Evolution doesn't explain homosexuality
LGBT Project (LGBT): Category:Marriage
Religion Wiki (Religious): Homosexuality 		Politics Mises.org (Austro-libertarian): None
Conservapedia (US right-wing, Christian conservative): Same-sex marriage
Ameriwiki (US right-wing, Christian conservative): Homosexuality
dKosopedia (US left-wing): Homosexuality
LeftSpace (US left-wing): None
Liberapedia (US left-wing): Gay marriage
Metapedia (Neo-Nazi): Homosexual "marriage"
Christian wikis IronChariots (Biblical, counter-apologetics): Homosexuality
Christianity Knowledge Base (Christian): Homosexuality
WikiChristian (Christian): Homosexuality
A Storehouse of Knowledge (Christian): Homosexuality
Creation Wiki (Creationist): Homosexuality
Theopedia (Evangelical Protestant): Homosexuality
OrthodoxWiki (Orthodox Christian): Homosexuality
Catholic Wiki (Roman Catholic): None
Theologia (Christian, ecumenical): None 		Other religious wikis WikiIslam (anti-Islamic): Homosexuality
Bahaikipedia (Bahá’í): Homosexuality
Dhamma Wiki (Buddhist, Theravada): Homosexuality
Hindupedia (Hindu): None
Judaism Wiki (Jewish): None
Messianic (Messianic Jewish): None
MuslimWiki (Muslim): None
Wikipagan (Neopagan): None
Scientology (Scientology, independent): None
SikhiWiki (Sikh): Homosexuality and Sikhism

Retrieved from "http://www.argumentrix.com/w/1.20.3/index.php?title=Governments_should_recognize_both_opposite_and_same_sex_marriages&oldid=13823"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox