Tags: Help With Media EssayWhat Is A Dissertation DefenseArchitect EssayTeam Building Leadership EssayNew York Bar Exam EssaysComputer Architecture And Organization Research PapersHow To Measure Critical ThinkingCreative Writing AustraliaDemocracy Essay
May I refer him to the elderly or infertile straight couples who cannot produce children? “But studies have shown heterosexual parents are better for children.” No, they have not.
A single person could submit their signature online multiple times providing they used different email addresses (which were not verified).
Programs that allow for anonymity of IP addresses also enabled anyone around the world to add their signature.
The Office for National Statistics shows how civil, non-religious marriage made up 68 per cent of all marriages in the UK during 2010.
Let us not forget matrimony existed long before Jehovah was even a word you weren’t allowed to say. “Marriage has always been a bond between one man and one woman.” This declaration ignores the legally married gay couples in Canada, Spain, Portugal, Argentina, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Belgium, Netherlands, and South Africa.
Our relationships are just as loving and valid as heterosexual relationships, but our current marriage laws suggest it is not. ” To turn the argument on its head, one simply has to ask why society feels the need to segregate our rights from those of heterosexuals. One does not compromise equal rights otherwise they are not equal rights. “Gay people in the UK already have civil partnerships which provide all the same rights as marriage.” Civil partnerships were born out of politicians pandering to homophobia.
We are equally human and we should be treated by the law as such. It has nothing to do with approval, and has everything to do with equality. A step in the right direction, perhaps, but they are a separate form of recognition that reaffirmed society’s wish to keep homosexuals at arm’s length should we somehow “diminish” true marriage. Furthermore, I have been told it is offensive to brand such remarks “bigoted”, and that I am the bully.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.Even if most people were against gay marriage, which polls consistently show is not the case, majority will is no justification for the exclusion of a minority. “Why is it so important for gay people to have marriage?” For the same reason it is important to straight people. ” Should women have compromised their right to vote?No single straight person’s marriage will be affected by letting gay people marry.Another form of the above argument is “Why should we bother changing the law just to cater to 4% of the population?I would ask them to stop focusing on my genitals, and start paying attention to my humanity. “Gay marriage will confuse the terms ‘husband’ and ‘wife’, or ‘mother and ‘father’.” Another form of the previous argument. “Gay people cannot have children and so should not be allowed to marry.” The Archbishop of York John Sentamu used a barely disguised version of this argument in a piece for the when he referred to “the complementary nature of men and women”.It is not hard but I’ll say it slowly just in case … as “husbands”, and married women will refer to themselves … Male parents will be “fathers” and female parents will both be “mothers”. He is insinuating, of course, that homosexual relationships are not complementary by nature because they cannot produce offspring, and therefore they are unnatural and undeserving of the word “marriage”.While it is true that many reputable studies have shown two-parent families tend to be most beneficial, the gender of the parents has never been shown to matter.The studies cited by actively homophobic organisations like the Coalition for Marriage were funded by anti-gay organisations, or have basic methodology flaws – for example, they would compare married straight couples with un-wed gay couples, or they would take a person who may have had a single curious experience with the same sex and define them as exclusively homosexual.