In the recent years, the LGBT rights movements have gained momentum both in the States and internationally. Not only are more people in favour of LGBT rights (particularly same-sex marriage, as recent polls have shown), they are also seeing through the flawed nature of arguments set by those opposed to said rights. This research paper will be discussing ten of the most common arguments presented by opposers of LGBT rights (particularly expressing identity and marriage laws), as well as outline why each are easily flawed and refutable.
“It Is Not Natural”
Aside from the Bible argument, this is one of the most common and basic arguments against the LGBT rights movement. Opponents who present this argument claim that homosexual behavior and marriage will “disrupt the natural order,” and often claim that any sexuality or identity outside of heterosexuality and cisgender is a “choice.” In reality, there is nothing natural about marriage to begin with as it originated as a social institution created by humans.
In another note, the concept of homosexuality or same-sex unions are nothing new to the human race, having been traced back to ancient times. Through studies, same-sex unions and marriages have been traced back to Ancient Greece and Rome, ancient Mesopotamia, in some regions of China (such as the Fujian province) and at certain times in ancient Europe. The Americas also have records of same-sex unions and the recognition of third gender through ancient Native American societies. On one final note, homosexual behavior is not limited to humans and has been recorded in over 1, 500 species (ranging from primates to parasites like the gut worm). 500 of the species are currently being documented (due to most of them being in ca...
... middle of paper ...
...upport of a federal government act like DOMA which essentially tramples states’ rights.
At long last we have covered ten of the most common arguments against LGBT rights, particularly same-sex marriage. Needless to say there are plenty of other arguments out there against the LGBT community, yet all lack logical and reasonable basis for denying us equal rights. Opposing the inevitable is a waste of precious time, money and energy. It is time those who oppose LGBT rights to start turning their focus back onto their own lives and accept the facts. Legalizing same-sex marriage is not going to force them to marry someone of the same-sex. The only think they will be “forced” to do, is to acknowledge the right of all humans to be treated equally. After all, when it comes to the States, is it not under the law, “Liberty and Justice for All” should not come with a disclaim?
Abstract On June 26, 2015 a divided Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples could now marry nationwide. At the time of the split ruling there were 9 supreme court justices, 5 of the justices were Republicans, and the remaining 4 were Democrats. In high profile cases it is except that the justices will vote along party lines. When the 5-4 ruling was reveled by the following statement. “It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right (Corn,2015).” written by
Thomas B. Stoddard’s “Gay Marriages: Make Them Legal” is a successfully written argument with some minor flaws in technique. Stoddard uses this article to present his major claim, or central thesis, on the reasons gay marriage should be legalized. He presents his argument using minor claims. In a lecture on February 2, 2005, James McFadden stated a minor claim is the secondary claim in an argument. Stoddard uses minor claims in his discussion of homosexual people being denied their rights by the government and by others who discriminate against them. He also discusses how love and the desire for commitment play a big part in the argument for and against gay marriage.
Currently, only 13 countries offer rights for members of the LGBT community. Within those countries, few offer equal rights such as health care, marriage rights, and adoption to LGBT members. Many people around the globe would agree that these rights, along with all other rights granted to heterosexuals, should not be granted to these members of the LGBT community. One prevalent notion is that being gay, or being included in the LGBT community, is unnatural. This notion is simply incorrect; everyone, no matter their gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation does, in fact, deserve the same liberties as their heterosexual counterparts. Being a member of the LGBT community has no negative effect on the lives of others unless those people view heterosexuality in a negative light, allowing it to bedevil them, and ultimately change the way they live their life. Being gay is completely natural. Though some would argue that homosexuality is unnatural, others would disagree, being that research has been conducted. The conclusion was that the way people think and feel towards others is s...
Same-sex marriage has been one of the most controversial topics in the United States, and gay couples have been facing harsh judges by others. Gay marriage is very important because it challenges our values on freedom, and this will affect the next generation’s understanding of marriage. In “The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage,” the author uses historical facts trying to convince his audience that same-sex marriage should be protected under laws and granted respect by people. On the other hand, the author of “Prop 8 Hurts My Family-ask Me How” uses incidences of how homosexual couples are being harassed and discriminated by others to show how they were unequally treated after prop 8 was passed. They both use the rhetorical strategies effectively
Homosexuality has existed since the beginning of recorded human history and yet, attitudes towards gay and lesbian individuals vary extensively. Some societies tolerate them; others openly welcome and encourage them; and most blatantly condemn them (Bates, 46). Throughout our country’s history, homosexuals have been misunderstood and discriminated against, leading many to acquire an irrational fear of gays and lesbians. Known as homophobia, this fear has prompted heterosexual individuals with a feeling a superiority and authority when using the word “homosexual” interchangeably with the words pervert, faggot, sodomite, and so on. Homophobes typically perceive homosexuality as a threat to society. Nonetheless, the Gay Rights Movement has achieved impressive progress since 1973 when the American Psychological Association (APA) eradi...
Let us first consider the premise that homosexuality is contrary to Natural Law, because the Natural Law dictates that sexual relationships must be heterosexual and have as a (perhaps eventual) goal of reproduction. According to an Australian newspaper, there are 450 species of animals on the Earth that practice homosexuality. Although asexual worms may come to mind at first, the article clearly states that the most frequent occurrences are by pygmy chimpanzees (50% of all sexual activity), and that "wild bottlenose dolphins can form long-lasting male-male pair bonds." The behaviors of only these two species can begin to show us the flaws with human Natural Law Theory. Even if we do not believe in evolution, chimpanzees still share 98% of human DNA, and dolphins are humanity's acknowledged "intellectual cousins." If one is inclined to discredit this comparison on grounds that humans are the only rational species, then consider this quote. "[Homosexuality]...could be linked to a genetic tendency for heightened sexual activity, giving the animals a reproductive advantage, or it could have s...
"The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute... The principle requires liberty of taste and pursuit; of framing the plan of our life to suit our own character; doing as we like, subject to such consequences as may follow; without impediment from our fellow creatures, so long as what we do does not harm them, even though they should think our conduct foolish, perverse or wrong." This quote from John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, lays out the philosophical groundwork for the right to privacy. Although the United States Constitution does not explicitly guarantee this right, the Supreme Court through landmark cases such as Roe v Wade, Griswold v. Connecticut, and Eisenstadt v. Baird have judicially established privacy rights under limited zones relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, childrearing, and education.
In today’s society, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community has been more accepted then in years prior, especially in the 1960’s and years prior to that, when anyone in the LGBT community would be horribly ridiculed, if not tortured. However, there still lies a long road for the LGBT community, as it pertains to human rights, equality, and particularly, marriage equality. Each individual has their own perception on marriage equality, whether it is based on moral basis, or on a humanistic (humane) basis, which is the belief of not denying anyone the right to be who they are, and therefore love who they love. However, as a society, we must examine the facts, as well as ourselves, as we address the debate for marriage equality for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender community.
As a United States citizen who was born in the new millennium, I was brought up with the idea that, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This statement was one of the main sources of fuel for the Civil Rights Movements in the mid 1950’s/60’s in the United States. Minority groups have often been mistreated in the United States culminating in movements much like that of the women’s suffrage movement, civil rights movements and now a movement toward equality for the LGBTQIA. In the last few decades a new minority group, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, queer/questioning, intersex and allies, and their struggle to attain their right to the pursuit of happiness. This small makes up roughly 4 percent of the US population. Though many say that gay marriage will weaken the moral foundation of our country, it should be legalized, not only because banning it is unconstitutional, but also because strips people of their human rights
Within America’s society today, 3.8 percent of the population is gay, lesbian, or bisexual. With only 17 of the 50 states legalizing and recognizing this type of relationship (“History…”), it puts a stronghold on same-sex couples to publicly declare their love with the promise of marriage. Same-sex marriages should be legalized because everyone has equal rights of freedom and liberty.
A prevalent issue among individuals in today’s society is the idea of gay marriage. This is the idea that two males or two females can be married. Although many people accept this, there are people that try to argue that gay marriage will destroy the concept of marriage and the idea/concept of procreation. Gay marriage was legalized in 2015, but is still a prevalent issue because the opposing side is trying to get the law revoked. Not only is gay marriage a prevalent issue but so is discrimination against the LGBT community. In reference to the position supporting gay marriage, the discussion will focus on: the overall idea of gay marriage, discrimination against the LGBT community in the workplace and discrimination against the LGBT community
To come straight to the point, I believe that there is no difference between same sex and traditional marriages regarding validity or moral implications. One could argue that the bond between man and woman is valid, since biologically they are able to have a child. This would go along with scientific theories such as evolution. Yet, man is not an animal. Mankind has elevated himself to a point where we do not rely on instincts, but use our brains in order to survive.
In conclusion I argue that banning same-sex marriage is discriminatory. It is discriminatory because it denies homosexuals the many benefits received by heterosexual couples. The right to marriage in the United States has little to do with the religious and spiritual meaning of marriage. It has a lot to do with social justice, extending a civil right to a minority group. This is why I argue for same-sex marriage. The freedom to marry regardless of gender preference should be allowed.
When one hears the words “LGBT” and “Homosexuality” it often conjures up a mental picture of people fighting for their rights, which were unjustly taken away or even the social emergence of gay culture in the world in the1980s and the discovery of AIDS. However, many people do not know that the history of LGBT people stretches as far back in humanity’s history, and continues in this day and age. Nevertheless, the LGBT community today faces much discrimination and adversity. Many think the problem lies within society itself, and often enough that may be the case. Society holds preconceptions and prejudice of the LGBT community, though not always due to actual hatred of the LGBT community, but rather through lack of knowledge and poor media portrayal.
Many people believe in a traditional marriage between a man and a woman. God created man and woman to be faithful and produce children. Same-sex marriage is contrary to the word of God and the laws of nature; therefore, it is incompatible with the beliefs, sacred texts, and traditions of many religious groups. Many biblical scriptures talk about how immoral same-sex marriage is.