Over time, marriage has been the solid base for procreation and child rearing, which is the foundation of family and social life. There is recognition that allowing polygamous or closely related couples into our marriage system would be dysfunctional in our society. Does this not apply to same-sex marriage as well? The social unacceptability of same-sex marriage, the danger of contracting AIDS, and the bad influence on children prove that same-sex marriage should not be legalized. Homosexual activists, approximately three percent of our population, argue that those who do not agree with them are “homophobic” or “heterosexist.
However, that argument is merely prejudiced against society. Today’s society can certainly have its own opinion. The rights and laws of homosexuals are ultimately restricted. Congress’s litigation now describes laws that prevent gays and lesbians from marrying, procreating, or adopting (Williams 299). Marriage, as well as adoption, is considered a privilege; those who marry or adopt must obey the laws. No examples in past history occur in which same-sex unions were given the equal rights and legal recognition as heterosexual unions (Kaplan 16).
Factually, recent polls state that two-thirds of American adults oppose same-sex unions in which the homosexuals are given rights such as tax breaks, Social Security, divorce rights, hospital visits, custody, or inheritance. In a different poll taken, American adults were asked if homosexual marriage should be legal; sixty-four percent stated no, while only twenty-nice percent said yes. The same group of adults were also asked about homosexual adoption. Fifty-seven percent said no, while thirty-five percent agreed (Cloud 44).
Broadening our systematic form of marriage weakens it. on a different note, the number of gays (males) exceeds the number of lesbians, and legalizing same-sex marriage may result in male domination, defeating the woman’s role in society. A hierarchy of gay marriage holding more economic power and social status could become, overcoming even all heterosexual unity (Williams 317). The main reason the state is interested in marriage has been to provide financial and emotional security, as well as role models for children.
In the current marriage system of only opposite-sex unity, the protection of procreation is properly emphasized. However, over the last century heterosexual marriage has declined because notions of what makes a good man or woman have changed, resulting in self-fulfillment elsewhere than in marriage and family. The symbolism of homosexual marriage is also disturbing. For example, a lesbian or gay wedding has a heavy symbolic message on all guests that attend, including children, cooks, and waiters. Generations to come will remember the homosexual wedding as part of their friend’s or loved one’s lifestyle.
Even though some homosexual unions may raise children better than some heterosexuals, the homosexual union is a symbolic attack of the norm of society and highly unaccepted by society. It is a known fact that homosexuals are ultimately discriminated. Even in San Francisco, California, where gays are populous, the homosexuals routinely experience discrimination, hate, and rejection. These factors also show that same-sex marriage is unaccepted by society. Surely, if same-sex marriage becomes a natural reality, then bisexual and three-some marriages will follow. What will become of society?
The AIDS virus plays a very significant part in homosexuality. The persons with the highest risk of contracting the AIDS virus are gay or bisexual white males (Williams 305). This AIDS virus is spread continuously because the gay individual may either not know he is HIV positive or may choose not to inform his sexual partner. Both ways are equally dangerous, especially since gays often have multiple sex partners. Since AIDS is most commonly spread by bodily fluids, the HIV virus is most common for sexually active individuals. Consider the case of the North family. They married in 1982 but separated in 1991 when Mr.
North admitted to an affair with another woman. He learned he was HIV positive in April 1991, but continued to have unprotected sexual intercourse with his wife until his June confession. After a year’s separation, Mr. North revealed that there was no other woman; he had engaged in homosexual activities beginning in 1979, continuing through his marriage, and he and his homosexual lover- also HIV positive- intended to inform the children about his new lifestyle. Mrs. North then filed for divorce and asked that visitation be limited to protect the children from the possibility of contracting HIV.
She believed that because he had repeatedly lied to her, he could not be trusted to adequately guard the children against exposure to the gay lifestyle (Williams 307). HIV-positive homosexuals often lie about having AIDS in order to keep their sexual partners. One HIV-positive male explained, “I feel dangerous to my sex partner. But I have to keep perspective and maintain my sexuality” (Williams 316). Bisexuals, as well as homosexuals, come in contact with AIDS with varying responses. Obviously, the AIDS virus is common in homosexuality. Would legalizing same-sex marriage not increase the range of individuals carrying the HIV virus?
Homosexuality creates a bad influence on children. The concentration of children growing up in homosexual families is mostly in San Francisco, New York, and other large urban cities. The children of same-sex married couples are often deprived of role models to look up to. Children of lesbian couples will be deprived of a father, the effects of which are well documented. The sexual preference of children of homosexual parents is also affected. It is reasonable to state the rate at which children of lesbian couples choose same-sex partners is geometrically larger than the rate of children of heterosexual parents.
A recent survey concludes that nine out of twenty-five (36%) children of lesbian mothers and four out of twenty-one (19%) children of heterosexual mothers reported same-sex attraction. Additionally, six of twenty-five (24%) children of lesbian mothers and zero of twenty-one (0%) children of heterosexual mothers reported becoming involved with someone of the same gender (Williams 308). Clearly, the child’s sexual preference is affected by the parent’s sexuality. A child of homosexual parents may also have affected behavior. Serious health problems may incur from being a child of gay or lesbian couples.
Past research on children of lesbian or gay couples is marred my methodological problems, including heavy reliance on self-reporting and a tendency to ignore evidence not supporting a conclusion. Boys raised by masculine fathers feel more secure and generally do not commit crimes. Boys of lesbians may be susceptible to this behavior. Homosexuals also have a history of unstable relationships, so the children may suffer family disruptions often. Another peril involved with same-sex couples is their history of substance abuse.
As a group, same-sex couples are known for substance abuse, which may lead to a shorter life expectancy than heterosexuals, as well as a bad influence on children (Williams 308). Despite some failures, the family of a husband, wife, and children offers yet the best environment for human development. Same-sex marriage may eventually damage the norm in our society and disrupt human life. Many factors demonstrate that same-sex marriage is a disruption to human life. The social unacceptability of same-sex marriage, the danger of contracting AIDS, and the bad influence of children prove that homosexual marriage should not be legalized.