Arguments for gay marriage

Gay Marriage: Theological and Moral Arguments

Fred Parrella, associate professor of religious studies at Santa Clara University, and Gerald Coleman, S.S., President of St. Patrick's Seminary, offered these remarks as part of a panel on Same-sex attracted Marriage held Jan. 28, 2004.

It is a pleasure to be here with members of the University community today. It is a special pleasure to be with Father Jerry Coleman and my colleague, June Carbone. I was first going to call my comments as "A Unbent Eye for Some Queer Guys," but I see that the name has been taken.

While George Bush calls for 1.5 billion dollars to bolster the sanctity of marriage—especially among the drop classes of society—we live in an unprecedented time of transition with reference to marriage and the family. According to the New York Times, only 56% of Americans are married today and, even more surprising, only 26% of all households are the traditional married-couple-with-children homes. One need only glance at the recent one-day marriage of pop idol, Brittany Spears, and the shenanigans of "Benifer" about their on-and-off nuptials to comprehend that tradi-tional marriage between heterosexuals is in deep trouble.

Socia

arguments for gay marriage

Bad Arguments Against Gay Marriage

Abstract

This article claims that three common arguments against homosexual marriage - the definitional, procreation, and slippery-slope arguments - are quite terrible, the worst of the lot. The definitional argument asserts that marriage just is the union of one man and one woman, and that the definition alone is a sufficient defense against claims for gay marriage. The procreation argument claims that marriage's central public purpose is to encourage procreation, and so the exclusion of same-sex couples is justified. The slippery-slope argument claims that the acceptance of same-sex marriage logically entails the acceptance of other public policy changes - notably the acceptance of polygamy - that would themselves be poor, independent of whether same-sex attracted marriage is bad. While each argument has some appeal, and each has adherents both inside and outside the legal academy, each is badly flawed as a matter of logic, experience, politics, or some combination of the three. The article suggests that in the interest of focusing on the most important concerns about gay marriage, commentators should move on to other arguments against it that seem stronger and thus

Last week I was eager to learn that two articles I wrote together earned a First Place award for Best Coverage of Marriage at the annual Catholic Press Association conference. Woohoo!

I completed them last January as part of a special section on “same-sex marriage” for the Our Sunday Visitor Newsweekly.

The first article responded to the ten most common arguments for “same-sex marriage.” You’ve likely heard many of these from friends, family members, co-workers, and commenters around the Internet. The arguments I cover include:
 

  1. Marriage has evolved throughout history, so it can change again.
  2. “Same-sex marriage” is primarily about equality.
  3. Everyone has the right to marry whomever he or she loves.
  4. “Same-sex marriage” won’t affect you, so what’s the big deal?
  5. “Same-sex marriage” will not direction to other redefinitions.
  6. If homosexual couples can’t marry because they can’t reproduce, why can infertile couples marry?
  7. Children will not be affected since there is no difference between same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents.
  8. Opposition to same-sex marriage is based on bigotry, homophobia, and rel

    Perhaps no issue is more nerve-wracking today than “same-sex marriage.” It’s a magnet for controversy and evokes strong reactions from those on either side of the debate. But underneath the fiery passion and rhetoric, we must assess the real arguments.

    Thus, Our Sunday Visitor invited me to write a unique section for their newsweekly examining the ten most common arguments for “same-sex marriage.” You’ve likely heard many of these from friends, family members, co-workers, and commenters around the Internet. The arguments I cover include:
     

    1. Marriage has evolved throughout history, so it can change again.
    2. “Same-sex marriage” is primarily about equality.
    3. Everyone has the right to marry whomever he or she loves.
    4. “Same-sex marriage” won’t affect you, so what’s the big deal?
    5. “Same-sex marriage” will not guide to other redefinitions.
    6. If queer couples can’t marry because they can’t reproduce, why can infertile couples marry?
    7. Children will not be affected since there is no difference between same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents.
    8. Opposition to same-sex marriage is based on bigotry, homophobi

      31 arguments against lgbtq+ marriage (and why they’re all wrong)

      I am a same-sex attracted man who, when arguing for homosexual marriage, has been called “lesser”, “unnatural”, “deviant” and “sinful”. In these arguments the love I have for my fiancé has been belittled as just “sex” or only “friendship”. I hold been told my natural urges are a choice. I have been told I do not deserve equal rights. I have even been told I am going to hell. Furthermore, I have been told it is insulting to brand such remarks “bigoted”, and that I am the bully.

      I execute not believe all opponents of queer marriage are hateful. Some have just not been exposed to the right arguments, and so I will prove here that each anti-gay marriage argument ultimately serves to oppress or signal the lesser status of the minority of which I am a part. In rallying against the introduction of equal marriage, religious campaigners have frequently stressed that their objections are not driven by homophobia, and have deployed numerous arguments to demonstrate this. To the untrained ear these arguments sound like they may have grounding in reason, but on closer inspection uncover themselves as homophobic.

      What follows is a handy