Skip Nav

Gay Marriage Essay / Research Paper Example

Arguments Against Same Sex Marriages

❶This is an anti-gay issue and not a pro marriage or child protection issue.

Arguments for Same Sex Marriages

Quality papers at the best prices
The Anti-Gay-Marriage Propaganda Effort
The Arguments Against Gay Marriage

Getting married is a decision which is personal and private. The controversy brought by gay marriages includes changing the norm of marriage and challenges in existing laws and religious traditions. Many religions in the world object to the issue of gay marriages on the grounds of morality. Churches base on their beliefs of what is wrong or right on scriptures which are holy writings.

The church believes that allowing the gay couples to adopt children would be an injustice as the children will lack the proper moral upbringing. Opponents of gay marriages cite the increased social costs such as healthcare thus affecting the economy. Those against this kind of marriage think that same sex couples should not be allowed to adopt children. The opponents are generally concerned about the harmful effect gay marriages would have on the society in case of legalization.

They believe that the family institution is protected through heterosexual marriage whose main aim is to procreate. They further believe that marriage would no longer have the same meaning if homosexual couples find alternative methods of having children Nagle First, every person has a right to exercise and acquire freedom and equality as a basic law.

In many countries such as the United States same sex marriages are outlawed although some government leaders insist on legalizing the gay marriages because they believe in the principle of equality. The church opposes same sex marriage since they believe that the bible instructs how Christians should properly live. The church believes that God wants marriage which is between a man and a woman. The church is against the legalization of gay marriages as they believe many people may choose to live homosexually thus promoting it as acceptable in the society.

According to the church, allowing the gay couples to adopt children would be an injustice as the children will lack the proper moral upbringing.

If gay marriage was legalized they can have the same rights as heterosexuals in terms of adoption and medical rights Lopez In conclusion, issue of same sex marriage has raised many debates for many years. Same sex marriages have some disadvantages while on the other hand, it can mean denial of basic rights to enjoy the human benefits.

Same sex marriages are outlawed in many countries such as the United States although some government leaders insist on legalizing the gay marriages because they believe in the principle of equality. Many churches oppose same sex marriage and believe that God wants marriage to be between a man and a woman. As a result, the church is against the legalization of gay marriages because it can be viewed by the society as promoting homosexually in the society.

Gay marriages can be granted the legal rights which mean a threat to the stability of the traditional meaning of family. Gays and lesbians can also be granted the rights to legal marriage in order to ensure that all citizens enjoy full human rights.

Therefore, if gay marriage is legalized they can have the same rights as heterosexuals in terms of adoption and medical rights Lopez On the other hand, the religions would be offended since marriage is an institution supposed to be holy and ordained by God if gays and lesbians are legalized. Therefore, by allowing same sex marriage sanctity of marriage would be violated.

If gay marriages are not legally recognized the harmful consequences the couples would face include inability to participate in medical decisions that involve their partner who are dying, lack of right to own common property and exclusion from employment benefits. As a result, gay marriages are the eventual rejection of objective reality where an environment of going against the norm is created Larocque Your email address will not be published.

Arguments Against Same Sex Marriages For a long time the culture of men and women marrying each other in the society has been established globally. Various denominations have reached opposing beliefs and practices concerning homosexuality. What explicitly does the Bible teach about homosexuality? This question I consider to be basic because, if we accept God's Word on the subject of homosexuality, we benefit from His adequate answer to this problem. I am concerned only with the Christian or biblical view of homosexuality.

The Bible has much to say about sex sins in general. This answer assumes that the Bible is inerrant - that it is free of error. It also assumes that the authors were inspired by God. Only conservative Christians believe this.

He assumes that there is only one "Christian or biblical view" of homosexuality. In fact, there are many conflicting views by various Christian groups. First, there is adultery. Adultery in the natural sense is sexual intercourse of a married person with someone other than his or her own spouse.

It is condemned in both the Old and New Testaments Exodus Christ forbids dwelling upon the thoughts, the free play of one's imagination that leads to adultery Matthew 5: Second, there is fornication, the illicit sex acts of unmarried persons which is likewise forbidden I Corinthians 5: Then there is homosexuality which likewise is condemned in Scripture.

The Apostle Paul, writing by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declares that homosexuality [sic] " shall not inherit the kingdom of God " I Corinthians 6: Now Paul does not single out the homosexual as a special offender.

He includes fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, thieves, covetous persons, drunkards, revilers and extortioners. Strauss confidently declares that 1 Corinthians 6: But the original text of this passage contains Greek words whose meanings have been lost.

Biblical translators have had to guess what this passage means. Various Bible translations translate the terms as: Some Bibles in the English language say that the passage refers both to men who sexually abuse boys and to the boys victims that they abuse. There is every evidence that St. Paul knew of such sexual abuse, and was also aware of ritual homosexual rituals in Pagan temples.

There is no evidence that he was aware of consensual, committed relationships between gay males. It is notable that lesbians are not referred to at all in this passage. The passage will probably continue to be obscure. And then he adds the comment that some of the Christians at Corinth had been delivered from these very practices: But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the spirit of our God " I Corinthians 6: All of the sins mentioned in this passage are condemned by God, but just as there was hope in Christ for the Corinthians, so is there hope for all of us.

Paul refers to the positive effects of religious conversion. Believers no longer engaged in casual sex, excessive drinking, criminal activities, etc. These changes in behavior are seen today as well, among newly converted people. Studies have shown that sexual orientation is apparently not changeable either. Homosexuality is an illicit lust forbidden by God.

He said to His people Israel, " Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: In these passages homosexuality is condemned as a prime example of sin, a sexual perversion.

The Christian can neither alter God's viewpoint nor depart from it. Both Leviticus quotations are from the Holiness Code which lists ethical and ritual laws to be followed by the ancient Israelites.

They include many dietary, sanitary and other laws. A consensus exists among liberal and mainline Christian theologians, pastors and teleministers that the Holiness Code is no longer applicable for today's Christians.

Conservative Christians generally agree; however, they still want to retain the two elements of the Code which appear to prohibit male homosexuality. We have been unable to find a justification for the rejection of most of the laws, while retaining these 2.

The Hebrew word to'ebah is often translated "abomination" in English. This is a poor translation; "ritually unclean" would be better. An ancient Israelite eating a meal with a non-Jew is to'ebah. Eating eating a cheeseburger is also to'ebah. In the Bible sodomy is a synonym for homosexuality.

God spoke plainly on the matter when He said, " There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel " Deuteronomy The whore and the sodomite are in the same category.

Strauss is here quoting the King James Version of the Bible. The translation is in error. The verse does not refer to female hookers and male homosexuals.

The New International Version correctly translates this passage as: Same-sex activity is not mentioned. A sodomite was not an inhabitant of Sodom nor a descendant of an inhabitant of Sodom, but a man who had given himself to homosexuality, the perverted and unnatural vice for which Sodom was known.

Let us look at the passages in question:. And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them. And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: It is used frequently to denote sexual intercourse Genesis 4: The message in the context of Genesis 19 is clear. Lot pled with the men to " do not so wickedly.

A liberal Christian might reflect on Dr. Strauss' comment as follows: A man does not "give himself to homosexuality. Strauss apparently believed that everyone is a heterosexual, but that some engage in wicked homosexual acts. This was certainly the belief of the authors of the Bible. Society now realizes what homosexuals have known forever: Strauss refers to homosexuality as a "perverted and unnatural vice.

It is a practice that is against their sexual nature and identity. But one can argue with equal validity that heterosexuality is a "perverted and unnatural vice" for homosexuals. In only about a dozen of these cases does it refers to sexual activity - always heterosexual. In the remaining approximately occurrences, it refers to non-sexual knowing. It is unclear whether the "knowing" refers to a sexual act. References in Isaiah 1 , Jeremiah Sexual matters were not even mentioned.

Jude 7 refers to their lust for "sarkos heteras" Greek for "other flesh". This apparently refers to the men of Sodom wanting to engage in sexual activities with angels. Angels are a species that is not human. Their sin would be that of bestiality. You said that sexua1 intercourse outside of marriage is condemned in the Bible. How do you explain marriage ceremonies in which two persons of the same sex are united by an officiating clergyman or justice of the peace?

There are cases on record where a marriage license was issued to persons of the same sex. I recall one such incident in Phoenix, Arizona.

A marriage license was issued in the Maricopa County clerk's office to two men 39 and 21 years old respectively. The two men are reported to have "married" in a private ceremony.

However, to call a union of two persons of the same sex a " marriage " is a misnomer. In the Bible, marriage is a divinely ordered institution designed to form a permanent union between one man and one woman for one purpose among others of procreating or propagating the human race.

That was God's order in the first of such unions Genesis 1: If, in His original creation of humans, God had created two persons of the same sex, there would not be a human race in existence today.

The whole idea of two persons of the same sex marrying is absurd, unsound, ridiculously unreasonable, stupid. A clergyman might bless a homosexual marriage but God won't. Strauss gives a religious definition of a marriage. But marriage is much more than a religious ceremony; it has civil aspects.

It brings over economic and security privileges to the spouses. Many people feel that it "is absurd, unsound, ridiculously unreasonable, [and] stupid" to deny two people in a committed relationship the rights, privileges and responsibilities of marriage simply because they are of the same gender.

Some lesbians seek marriage so that they can raise their own children; some gay males seek marriage with the goal of forming a family and adopting one or more children. Strauss would seem to imply that a marriage between a man and woman is invalid if either of the spouses is infertile.

That is an insult to many millions of heterosexual couples. A Jesuit Priest, John J. McNeill, reportedly said in a conference Christianity Today, June 3, , " There is no clear condemnation of homosexual activity to be found anywhere in the Bible.

This particular Jesuit priest, like some other supposedly Christian theologians, have totally ignored the Scriptures as the guidelines for Christian behavior in regard to homosexuality. McNeill does not speak for the Roman Catholic Church, but for a small segment of priests who, having vowed themselves to celibacy, that is, to abstain from marriage and sexual intercourse, have found sexual gratification in homosexual acts. However, religious sex perverts are plentiful among Protestants.

Protestant leaders on both sides of the Atlantic have gradually eased away from the Scriptures. In England men like Bishop John Robinson, in his book Honest to God made a play on the term " The New Morality ," which in reality was a plea to open the door to immorality making it respectable and thus acceptable. The Bishop went so far as to describe the unscriptural adulterous relationship as " a kind of holy communion.

It is blasphemous and atheistic. Recently in America ten homosexually oriented religious organizations, comprised of men and women from more than a dozen denominations, and from seventeen states and Canada, met at Kirkbridge, a retreat and study center near Bangor, Pennsylvania. The retreat was entitled, " Gay and Christian. A practicing Christian, from the biblical viewpoint, will not be a practicing homosexual.

Of course, I make the distinction between a professing Christian and a practicing Christian. Calling one's self a Christian does not make one a Christian. Only recently he made a public announcement of his homosexuality. He claims that his public announcement of his homosexuality has brought him back to the church. Boyd does not tell us what he means by the " church "! Following is one point on which the speakers at Kirkbridge agreed: Homosexual religious leaders attempt to smooth over the breaks and rough places with Christian terminology so that a euphoria predominates, but God is not in it.

A truly born again person, who loves and understands the Bible as God's revelation to him, will not condone an evil that God condemns. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity " II Timothy 2: Practicing homosexuals are engaged in a divinely forbidden evil. Strauss' comment about Roman Catholic priests appears to imply that all priests who support equal rights for gays and lesbians are themselves active homosexuals.

He states that a real Christian cannot be a practicing homosexual. He says that homosexuals engage in a "divinely forbidden evil. However, liberal Christians sometimes point out that the Bible, in its original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, condemned homosexual rape, homosexual prostitution, homosexual sex rituals in Pagan temples, men sexually abusing boys, etc.

But on the topic of consensual homosexual activity within a committed, same-sex relationship, the Bible is silent. Why do homosexuals refer to themselves as "gay"? The word " gay " means merry, exuberant, bright, lively. More recently it has been adopted by homosexuals. In its original use it did not have this double meaning. The clever adaptation of the word " gay " by homosexuals has robbed it of its pure meaning, thereby corrupting a once perfectly good word.

I never use the word " gay " when referring to homosexuals. There are many bright, exuberant, merry people in this world who are not sexual perverts. The English language is in constant change.

Words change in meanings, sometimes within the period of a few months. This is not a process of corruption; it is one of evolution. Strauss, and many other conservative Christians believe that any sexual act between persons of the same gender is a perversion. One can understand his point of view.

He was presumably a heterosexual. And to a person with that sexual orientation, any homosexual act is difficult to understand and is probably personally repulsive. However, to a homosexual, it is a heterosexual act is difficult to understand and personally repulsive. Strauss has taken his own personal reaction to homosexuality and expanded it into an absolute. You made reference to First Corinthians 6: What is the meaning of the word " effeminate " in verse 9?

There are certain words in every language that can be used in a good or bad sense. In the context of this verse the use of " effeminate " is obviously in a bad sense. It is listed among other evils which are condemned. It describes feminine qualities inappropriate to a man. It is normal and natural for a woman to be sexually attracted to a man; it is abnormal and unnatural for a man to be sexually attracted to another man. Many male homosexuals are effeminate, but not all.

Nor are all lesbians unduly masculine. As described above, the word "effeminate" was selected by a few Bible translators because the meaning of the original Greek is unknown. Many liberal Christians feel that it is an invalid translation, and that the original Greek probably referred to men who sexually abused young boys.

Are there other Scriptures in the New Testament which deal with homosexuality? If one takes these Scriptures seriously, homosexuality will be recognized as an evil. The Romans passage is unmistakably clear.

Paul attributes the moral depravity of men and women to their rejection of " the truth of God " 1: They refused " to retain God in their knowledge " 1: The Old Testament had clearly condemned homosexuality but in Paul's day there were those persons who rejected its teaching.

Because of their rejection of God's commands He punished their sin by delivering them over to it. The philosophy of substituting God's Word with one's own reasoning commenced with Satan. He introduced it at the outset of the human race by suggesting to Eve that she ignore God's orders, assuring her that in so doing she would become like God with the power to discern good and evil Genesis 3: That was Satan's big lie.

Paul said that when any person rejects God's truth, his mind becomes " reprobate ," meaning perverted, void of sound judgment. The perverted mind, having rejected God's truth, is not capable of discerning good and evil. Paul wrote, " For this cause God gave them up into vile affections: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet " Romans 1: These verses are telling us that homosexuals suffer in their body and personality the inevitable consequences of their wrong doing.

Notice that the behavior of the homosexual is described as a " vile affection " 1: The Greek word translated " vile " atimia means filthy, dirty, evil, dishonorable. The word " affection " in Greek is pathos, used by the Greeks of either a good or bad desire. Here in the context of Romans it is used in a bad sense.

The " vile affection " is a degrading passion, a shameful lust. Both the desire lusting after and the act of homosexuality are condemned in the Bible as sin. Liberal Christians might conclude that in Romans 1: Paul was condemning that activities of some former Christians who reverted to Pagan beliefs and practices, engaged in idolatry, engaged in casual group sex, both heterosexual and homosexual.

It would appear that this passage condemns Pagan worship and group sex. It certainly has nothing to say about consensual sexual activity between two individuals in a committed, permanent relationship, whether gay or straight. It would seem to refer to adult males who sexually abuse children. As noted above, Jude 7 appears to refer to bestiality sex between two species , not to homosexual activity. There are those persons who say that homosexuality, even though a perverted form of the normal, God-ordained practice of sex, is a genetic problem, constitutionally inherited.

Is there evidence to support this view? I read in a periodical that in June, a panel of specialists in medicine, psychiatry, law, sociology and theology participated in a conference on homosexuality called by the Swiss Evangelical Church Union. That group reached the conclusion that homosexuality is not constitutionally inherited, it is not a part of one's genetic makeup. The ill-founded and unverifiable myth that homosexuality results from genetic causes is gradually fading away.

One would expect that a panel convened by a conservative Church group almost four decades ago would reach that conclusion. Since , studies have revealed the true nature of homosexuality. There are possibly a number of different ways in which homosexual practices could begin.

When boys and girls reach puberty and the genital organs develop, it is not uncommon for boys to experiment with boys, and girls with girls. In prisons where men and women are denied access to persons of the opposite sex for long periods of time, some are introduced to homosexuality for the first time.

A young Christian woman came to our office in Detroit for counseling. She became involved in lesbianism when her marriage began to fail. She was introduced to her first homosexual experience by a divorcee who was her neighbor. After six months of practicing lesbianism she was convicted of her sin and sought help. We were able to show her from the Bible that she was sinning and that God stood ready and willing to forgive and cleanse her. She confessed and forsook her sin, and continues to this day to live a happy, normal Christian life.

Studies have indicated that children who will become gay adults can be detected before the age of 5. It is apparent that sexual orientation is determined in early childhood. The woman in Detroit may have been a bisexual woman, not a lesbian. She was apparently able to switch from a male sexual partner to a female partner and perhaps back again without difficulty.


Main Topics

Privacy Policy

Anti Gay Marriage essays Gay marriage should not be permitted. Many people often justify their opposition to gay marriage with reference to their religious beliefs. It rejects natural law created by God. The bible says that lesbian and gay parenting is a sin. Homosexual couples can not procreate.

Privacy FAQs

This essay has been submitted by a law student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. What are the reasons for and against gay marriage.

About Our Ads

Anti gay marriage essays, - Maharashtra mba cet mock test papers. Your order will be assigned to a competent writer who specializes in your field of study. Analysis of a Religiously-based Anti-gay Essay. Sponsored link. His essay is in the form of a series of questions (Q) and answers (A). some gay males seek marriage with the goal of forming a family and adopting one or more children.

Cookie Info

An essay on why the arguments against gay marriage don't hold up in the light of reason. Gay Marriage: The Arguments and the Motives A personal essay in hypertext by Scott Bidstrup. Anti gay marriage essay - Use this service to get your valid paper delivered on time diversify the way you cope with your homework with our professional service Use from our cheap custom dissertation writing service and benefit from great quality.