In his article “For Gay Marriage,” Andrew Sullivan argues that homosexuals should be given the right to be legally married. Sullivan claims that homosexuals are just as deserving of marriage as heterosexuals are. Sullivan discusses how unethical it is to refrain a homosexual couple from marrying. He argues that legalizing gay marriage will promote a healthier environment for homosexuals by allowing young homosexuals, who have publicly announced their sexuality, to have role models. According to Sullivan, the legalization of gay marriage will help strengthen the bond between homosexuals and their parents. Sullivan also argues that homosexual relationships should be equal to heterosexual relationships.
In the DeLeon v. Perry same sex marriage case we learned of the diversity and disparity in individual rights. As of recent, same sex marriage has become a major issue in the United States and the development of equality for all. Although there are many opposed to same sex marriage suggesting the validity of constitutionality not one individual is against the due process of law. The due process of law is derived from the 5th and 14th Amendments and were established to protect individuals civil liberties and basic rights to life.
It can be hard to find your political view. Sometimes it takes time and research on political issues in our country and around the world. There are two popular political views; conservative and liberal. The definition for a conservative; is holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion. Liberal definition is; open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values. My political view is in between conservative and liberal, moderate.
The essay written by Katha Pollitt, titled, “What’s wrong with gay marriage” is an intriguing one. At first, the author, explains the notion that marriage and procreation do not necessarily go hand-in- hand. And later, she carefully interprets the true meaning of marriage; by stating there is a separation of church and state. Most importantly, the author speaks to her audience in a clear and logical manner; without adding personal biases. Although the essay may seem to have deterministic view on social behavior. Nonetheless, I believe that does not disqualify the series of argument which she makes.
S.O.I: This is a narrative style story written in first person. Its main purpose is to entertain readers; the story is based around the friendship of two friends, who had their friendship broken by a sudden event. They are now stuck in the forest together, and struggling to find a way out. The story is aimed at adolescent teens.
In Andrew Sullivan’s “For Gay Marriage” and William J. Bennett’s “Against Gay Marriage”, the two authors speak about the topic of marriage and what validates one. Sullivan is a former editor of the New Republic Magazine and is well versed in the topic of gay marriage. Bennett was a chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and has multiple writings over cultural issues. While both Sullivan and Bennett write about marriage and what constitutes a valid marriage, Sullivan appears to favor the idea that any two people can be married, while Bennett says that gay marriage will ruin the institution of marriage.
People compare gay marriage to crimes. Murder is a crime! Abuse is a crime! Being in love is priceless; it's not hurting anyone it's just their own happiness. Since when is being happy a crime? "Underneath it's all the same love.", was said by Macklemore. People commit suicide because others do not approve of them being
Denying homosexual couples the right to adopt may be helpful to the children, however, by letting same-gender couples adopt, they receive a more stable, permanent home. Children in the adoption system or the foster care system are without parents to look up to and learn from, and that can essentially be more harmful to the child. Perhaps what children need is the love that homosexual couples have the potential to provide. They need a family. This is debated in the article titled “Adoption Bills Put Religion Ahead of Kids" when it states "I'm not approaching this from an equal protection or parental advocacy perspective. I'm approaching it from the perspective of what children need…I know opponents of gay adoption think they're protecting kids by not allowing them to be raised in such a family. But a lot of these kids have no family" (Qtd. Dickerson 2). The situation cannot be looked at with a stubborn attitude, because a children’s life is on the line. The more time wasted on denying adoption rights to homosexual couples, the more time kids spend without a family or home. The opponents of same-gender are ruining the few chances these children have to have a home. To have a room of their own. To receive home cooked meals. To have parents that love them and want them. To have a family. Denying homosexuals the right to adopt causes the children waiting to be adopted to lose the chance of having all
Adoption is typically an option that is thought about when the process of conceiving a biological child is out of the question. For some couples it may be infertility, potential hereditary health problems, or that carrying a child would be dangerous to the mother and unborn child. Those are just some issues that would cause a heterosexual couple to contemplate the idea of adopting a child, but what about couples of the same-sex? Same-sex couples do not have the means to reproduce together so many opt for adoption, which sounds easy, but typically is not. Adoption is a long and hard drawn out process for any couple, but for couples that are of the same-sex, they typically get the shorter end of the stick. Most people believe that for a child
Love conquers all. Would not love overcome social stigmas put upon two people wanting to raise a family? A spotlighted topic today is the debate of homosexual couples, should they or should they not be allowed to adopt? I firmly believe gay couples should have the rights of any other couples wanting to adopt. Recently the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage. Most married couples dream of raising a child together, but a lot of people oppose letting homosexual couples adopt children. Letting gay couples adopt kids is great for both sides “Gay parents get to start their own family and give a home to an orphan.” (Gay 1). Although people claim homosexual parents cannot properly raise a child, it is discrimination not to let the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transvestite parents adopt and letting them adopt gives a child a happy loving home.
Introduction – The Foster Care system and Homosexual’s being able to adopt both show through research to provide many benefits to a child in need. Although neither seems to be the best option, people seem to have rooted for one more than the other due to sexual orientation, but what for? Doesn’t both foster care and homosexual adoption provide love and care for children or is one more suitable for children than the other? Through personal research it seems as if Homosexual’s adopting children is just as good as a child remaining in the Foster Care system (Claim).
Gay adoption is the adoption of children by same sex couples. Based on this topic, I’d like to look into the question “Are children adopted by gay parents more likely to have the psychological problem?” And the thesis I stated is that gay couples are able to provide a warm and normal environment for adopted children to grow up. I want to focus on this topic from the current situation of gay adoption, gay couples are capable of raising children and children adopted by gay parents are the same as those who born in heterosexual families.
In my essay I will state my opinion on the topic of whether or not gay people should be allowed to have children. I picked this topic as I feel very strongly towards it. I believe that gay people should be allowed to have children and these are my reasons why:
LGBT/ same-sex marriage is one of the most heated and controversial debates in our current society. Unlike the past thousands of years whereas marriage was defined as a legal union between a man and a woman, now the concept of marriage has been extended to a broader context. “Homosexuality” in most cultures is viewed as a disgrace, and it is often considered as a great sin from a religious aspect. But now our society has evolved, we gained clarity and reasons. We are now able to acknowledge and accept people who are different whereas we use to enslave and discriminate people who were a little different. But still, it seems we have a long way to
Homosexuality is becoming more and more accepted and integrated into today’s society, however, when it comes to homosexuals establishing families, a problem is posed. In most states, homosexuals can adopt children like any other married or single adult. There are many arguments to this controversial topic; some people believe that it should be legal nationally, while others would prefer that is was banned everywhere, or at least in their individual states. There are logical reasons to allow gays to adopt children, but for some, these reasons are not enough. The main issue really is, what is in the best interest of the child? This type of problem isn’t really one with causes, effects, and solutions, but one with pros and cons. Like any other adoption situation, a parent prove themselves to be responsible and capable enough to raise a child on their own, or with a spouse.