Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized by Arya Murthy

Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

I have a firm belief that every human being has the right to be treated equally and that every person has a right to be happy. In the present world, the idea of two men or two women falling in love, getting married and starting a family is still strange, sometimes even shocking to many people. However, in this day and age, I question whether it is right to deny two human beings access to equal rights and a chance at a happy life. In this essay, I will go over a few reasons why I believe that gay marriage should be legalized.

One of the main reasons that gay marriage is banned is the religious belief that homosexuals are “sinners”. This has influenced the court rulings of many countries, even ones that claim to be secular.  The fact is, at least in secular countries, that religion and law are two separate entities altogether.I understand the fact that many people have been taught to believe certain things all their life and do not question them and that religion can form the fundamentals of morality for some people.However, I firmly believe that the modern ideals of basic human rights and equality should be prioritized over the beliefs and guidelines set by ancient people in times long gone. In secular societies, religion and law are two separate entities and should remain that way.The religious beliefs of some people should not be imposed on others.

At this point, it is worth mentioning that not all religions are against homosexuality. One of the world’s largest religions, Hinduism, is actually not opposed to homosexuality. Many Hindu texts, such as the Vedas, the Kamasutra and the Smriti texts have directly or indirectly implied that it is not a sin to love someone of the same gender and regularly speak of the ‘third gender’, a category that includes all LGBTQ people. Many modern Hinduscholars, such as Sri Ravi Shankar, have concluded that since the soul has no gender, two members of any gender might love each other. The concept of duality, which means there is a male and female within each person, has also been cited as supportive of gay relationships.Overall, Hinduism’s ideas of the soul and of duality suggest that it is a homosexual-tolerant religion, although ideasvary from sect to sect. It is ironic that in India we have adopted Victorian England’s narrow views on the matter instead of being true to our own cultural beliefs.

            For those opponents who say homosexuality is a “modern” concept, I have to point to the fact that same-sex relationships havelong been accepted as a norm. An interesting fact is that in ancient Rome, the area in which Christianity first grew and flourished, there was simply no concept of homosexuality at all.  A man could have a relationship with another man and not be labeled as “homosexual” and “bisexual’. And it doesn’t stop there. Polynesian, African, Japanese, ancient Mesopotamean, Native American and Greek civilizations all accepted homosexuality and in many instances it was clearly celebrated. Most of these cultures only changed their morality under the influence of European colonial powers. If ancient societies could be open minded enough to accept the various different sexualities that human beings exhibit, why can’t we?

Another counter argument used very commonly against homosexuality is reproduction. Since it requires a male and a female member of a species to reproduce, love or attraction between two members of the same gender is considered wrong. For example, a California Supreme Court ruling in 1856 stated that “The first purpose of matrimony, by the laws of nature, is procreation.”I find this argument to be flawed, as in today’s world, with depletion of natural resources and overpopulation, what does it mean to say that the sole purpose of marriage is to have children? In any case, the number of couples who either cannot have children or don’t want to, means that marriage could not possibly be only about procreation. If so,these unions would be meaningless.

A very commonly used argument against homosexuals is that, since homosexuality is not natural, homosexuals are immoral. An interesting piece of information that not many people know is that homosexual behaviorhas been observed in a huge number of animal species in the wild such as, to name a few, lions, dogs, apes, monkeys, sheep, hyenas, dolphins, giraffes,birds (especially penguins), and dragonflies. In zoos, 20% of penguin couples are homosexualand remain with their mates for their entire lives.  Almost 50% of orange fronted parakeet matings are homosexual, and 90% of sexual activity of wild giraffes during mating season occurs between males. This indicates that homosexuality is in fact a natural occurrence. In any case, even if one does consider homosexuality to be an unnatural occurrence, one must question the worth of outlawing a completely harmless act simply on the grounds that it is “unnatural”.  Flying in a plane, using a phone, operating on another human’s heart, taking medication and using in-vitro fertilization are all practices that could never occur in nature, but humans continue to do these.  Humanity progresses; it has never been bound by the laws of what is “natural” and what is not. And neither should the LGBTQ population.

I would also like to mention that many people who oppose gay marriage on the grounds that homosexuality is immoral do so presuming that homosexuality is nothing more than lust. This is a flawed view as it reduces a relationship to being only about sex. A homosexual relationship is far more than that. Like any straight relationships, homosexual relationships are about mutual love, trust, security in hard times, companionship in old age all leading to the general happiness of both partners. Why would we deny anyone these basic human needs?

Many opponents to gay marriage claim that legalizing it would lead to “social instability”.  Some claim that legalizing one kind of non-traditional marriage would then allow other kinds of non-traditional relationships the right to marry, such as polygamous, bestial or incestuous relationships. James Dobson, a conservative preacher in the USA, predicted in 2005 that gay marriage would lead to “group marriage”, “marriage between daddies and their little girls” and “marriagebetween a man and his donkey”.  However, gay marriage is simply about two consenting adult members of the same sex getting married, which is a similar concept to heterosexual marriage, in which two consenting adult members of opposite sexes are married.  It is in no way similar to bestiality, which involves a human and an animal, or polygamy which involves more than two human beings. Any assumptions that legalizing gay marriage would lead society down a ‘slippery slope’ stem from a fear psychosis around homosexuals. One simply needs to look at all the countries in which gay marriage is legal:  Canada, France, the Netherlands, Spain, South Africa, none of which have shown a rampant increase in such immoral behavior as many conservatives claim.

Other people claim that gay marriage would somehow “weaken the institution of marriage”, leading to increased divorce rates and illegitimate births. Former US senator and Republican Party candidate Rick Santorum said that “Legalization of gay marriage would further undermine an institution that is essential to the well-being of children and our society. Do we need to confuse future generations of Americans even more about the role and importance of an institution that is so critical to the stability of our country?” This point is probably the most baseless claim ever made against homosexuals.  In what way would allowing marriage between two members of the same sex leads to other completely unrelated couples getting divorced, or having children before marriage?  These claims are usually made by people defending the argument that “marriage is only for procreation.” The majority of arguments against homosexuality stem from primitive and narrow-minded thoughts and ideas that have little or no basis in fact.

Finally, the most important reason to legalize gay marriage is to assimilate the LGBTQ population into society and protect their rights. Gay people are regularly discriminated against at school, workplace or society. While it may seem that this has very little to do with whether or not gay marriage is legalized, the fact is that, by denying certain people rights, the law effectively creates ‘second-class citizens’. This may send the signal to many people that homosexuals are not protected by law, thereby encouraging their mistreatment. Hate crimes such as the Orlando nightclub shooting earlier this year are far more common then we expect – 14% of hate crimes reported annually to the FBI are homophobic. Around 42% of American LGBTQ people report living in an unwelcoming environment and 80% of LGBTQ youth report social isolation and discrimination.Members of the LGBTQ community are three times more likely to experience depression, due to social discrimination and homophobic sentiments in the population, says the Australian Human Rights Commission. Worldwide, although awareness and tolerance have increased over the years, there is still very little being done to protect the rights of homosexuals, at least compared to the efforts being put in for women’s rights, racism and other forms of discrimination. This is why it is so important to encourage tolerance and sensitivity, a crucial step of which would be the legalization of gay marriage. Inter-racial marriage was an impossibility less than seventy-five years ago, but these laws have been abandoned because a progressive society saw them as unjust and cruel. Legalizing gay marriage would provide a chance for a normal happy life for many people while protecting their rights as human beings and not affecting the heterosexual community in any way.

After researching, reviewing the facts and contemplating about the issue, I have come to the firm conclusion that there is absolutely no valid reason to ban gay marriage.  Article 16 of the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights states – “Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or sex, have the right to marry and found a family.” This says nothing about whether or not the two people are male or female. A loving and supportive relationship is one of humanity’s basic needs. No one should have the right to deprive anyone of that.  I sincerely hope that this article has broadened the reader’s mind and convinced them of my point.