The Right to Marry
A comprehensive history of gay liberation would track the changes in attitude from
ancient cultures forward, some of which were more tolerant of homosexual conduct than the
world under Christianity. After Christianity became the dominant religion in the world,
homosexuality went underground and was prohibited by the then-prevailing interpretations of the
Bible. Religious opposition became encoded in law for most of the two thousand years, so that
homosexuals were persecuted mercilessly not only by religious authorities but also by
governments. The movement towards same-sex marriage was not an afterthought or something
that developed along the way but instead, it began almost simultaneously with women fighting
for equality. Extending marriage to LGBT couples seemed only a logical development of civil
rights.
The opposition to same-sex marriage is adept at exploiting phrases such as “traditional
marriage,” “family values” and “morally, ethically and religiously wrong” are always said
whenever topics involving the LGBT community such as same-sex marriage are brought up.
Additionally, some people oppose same-sex marriages because they assume that when
children are involved, it isn’t a “healthy” environment for them. They insist that children should
have both a mother and a father and not parents of the same gender.
Same-sex marriage is slowly gaining a foothold across the world. In countries like
Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Canada, South Africa and others, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender (LGBT) people can marry.
For LGBT people, the right to marry is primarily a civil rights issue. LGBT individuals
desire intimate, committed relationships no less than heterosexuals. Such relationships are a
critical component of a person’s life. Heterosexuals have the right to marry and share their life
with another person who has the same sexual orientation. Why should LGBT individuals be
denied this fundamental right? Moreover, freedom to marry whom they choose means
recognition that they are not second-class citizens, just as the same freedom meant that any race
are legally equal to everyone else.
Marriage is one of the society’s most fundamental institutions and it starts with either a
civil or a religious ceremony and legal consequences of the union determined by the state. There
will be no harm to the country—any country—if same-sex marriages are allowed. Excluding
homosexuals from the privileged status of marriage is an exercise in homophobia, infringes of
civil rights and is without any societal justification.
Marriage has a stabilizing or settling effect on the partners. Married men are more likely
than unmarried men to stay at home and out of trouble—a goal desired by the country or the
state. One of the main benefits of publicly recognized marriage is that it binds couples together
not only in their own eyes but also in the eyes of the society at large. Around the partners is
woven a web of expectations that they will spend their lives together—off the streets and at
home. The domesticating effect that marriage brings to both parties in a loving, committed
relationship, whether straight, gay or lesbian, should be encouraged by the government. It is
certainly better than the closet-gay culture and courting a series of different partners.
If marriage has any meaning at all, it is that, when you are beset with a physical,
emotional or mental problem, there will be someone to care for and comfort you. The caregiving
rationale for marriage applies equally to homosexuals. One of the first things many people worry
about when coming to terms with their homosexuality is: Who will take care of me when I’m
ailing or old? Society needs to care about this, to, as the Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
(AIDS) crisis has made horribly clear. If that crisis has shown anything, it is that no institution
can begin to match the care of a devoted partner. Legally speaking, marriage creates kin. Surely,
the society’s interest in kin-creation is strongest of all for people who are unlikely to be
supported by children in old age and who may well be rejected by their own parents in youth.
Caregiving is much better served by marriage—that is, by one-to-one lifelong commitment—
than by any other institutions.
The power of marriage is not just legal but also social. It seals its promise with the smiles
and tears of family and friends. Marriage is a compact between a couple and society, not just
between two people because society recognizes the sanctity and autonomy of the pair-bond, and
in exchange, each spouse commits to being the other’s only partner and lover.
If two adults of the same gender are committed to one another and prepared to abide by
the marriage compact, and if a ceremony of marriage was duly conducted by an authorized
clergy of state official, it is wrong and absurd for the state of country to forbid or refuse
recognition of such a marriage.
