Why should countries legalize homosexual marriages?

Pros please no cons :)

At least 3 different arguments.


It's for a school work..nothing personal -_-

7 Answers

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    It is no one else's business if two men or two women want to get married. Two people of the same sex who love each other should be allowed to publicly celebrate their commitment and receive the same benefits of marriage as opposite sex couples.

    There is no such thing as traditional marriage. Given the prevalence of modern and ancient examples of family arrangements based on polygamy, communal child-rearing, the use of concubines and mistresses and the commonality of prostitution, heterosexual monogamy can be considered "unnatural” in evolutionary terms.

    Gay marriage is protected by the Constitution's commitments to liberty and equality. The US Supreme Court declared in 1974’s Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur that the "freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause.” US District Judge Vaughn Walker wrote on Aug. 4, 2010 that Prop. 8 in California banning gay marriage was "unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.

    Denying same-sex couples the right to marry stigmatizes gay and lesbian families as inferior and sends the message that it is acceptable to discriminate against them. The Massachusetts Supreme Court wrote in an opinion to the state Senate on Feb. 3, 2004 that offering civil unions was not an acceptable alternative to gay marriage because "...it is a considered choice of language that reflects a demonstrable assigning of same-sex, largely homosexual, couples to second-class status."

    Gay marriages can bring financial gain to state and local governments. Revenue from gay marriage comes from marriage licenses, higher income taxes (the so-called "marriage penalty"), and decreases in costs for state benefit programs. The Comptroller for New York City found that legalizing gay marriage would bring $142 million to the City’s economy and $184 million to the State’s economy over three years.

    Gay marriage will make it easier for same-sex couples to adopt children. In the US, 100,000 children are waiting to be adopted. A longitudinal study published in Pediatrics on June 7, 2010 found that children of lesbian mothers were rated higher than children of heterosexual parents in social and academic competence and had fewer social problems. A July 2010 study found that children of gay fathers were "as well-adjusted as those adopted by heterosexual parents.

    Marriage provides both physical and psychological health benefits and recent research suggests that refusing to allow same-sex couples to marry has resulted in harmful psychological effects.

    Allowing same-sex couples to marry will give them access to basic rights such as hospital visitation during an illness, taxation and inheritance rights, access to family health coverage, and protection in the event of the relationship ending. An Oct. 2, 2009 analysis by the New York Times estimates that a same-sex couple denied marriage benefits will incur an additional $41,196 to $467,562 in expenses over their lifetime compared to a married heterosexual couple.

    The Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association found that more than a century of research has shown "no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies."

    Legalizing gay marriage will not harm heterosexual marriages or "family values.” A study published on Apr. 13, 2009 in Social Science Quarterly found that "laws permitting same-sex marriage or civil unions have no adverse effect on marriage, divorce, and abortion rates, or the percent of children born out of wedlock..."

    Massachusetts, which became the first state to legalize gay marriage in 2004, had the lowest divorce rate in the country in 2008. Its divorce rate declined 21% between 2003 and 2008. Alaska, the first state to alter its constitution to prohibit gay marriage in 1998, saw a 17.2% increase in its divorce rate. The seven states with the highest divorce rates between 2003 and 2008 all had constitutional prohibitions to gay marriage.

    If marriage is about reproduction, then infertile couples would not be allowed to marry. Ability or desire to create offspring has never been a qualification for marriage. George Washington, often referred to as "the Father of Our Country,” did not have children with his wife Martha Custis, and neither did four other married US presidents.

    Source(s): Read more @ http://gaymarriage.procon.org/ Have a good day! ♥
  • 7 years ago

    The idea behind not allowing homosexuals to marry, talking from a neutral position is perfectly fine. The government is deciding if gay/lesbian marriage is legal under the law- not if american churches should allow this. They can do what they want- but we're asking if homosexuals can be married by law. The entire argument that "my momma told me that marriage was between a man and a woman, and it should stay that way" is not even valid in their case. The us isn't telling churches to accept it- it's just if marriage by government is legal.

    And this is where my liberal-Democrat side starts kicking in. Many conservative organizations claim that "studies show that children in homosexual households will be blah blah blah". Well, that sounds a awful lot like those studies made by the Navy in WWII when they didn't allow Negroes to serves as anyone important on their ships. Where's your source? Can you prove it? Will we look back and say "wow, that was a ridiculous statement" like we did with naval studies in WWII?

    Source(s): Common sense, liberal-ish neutrality.
  • 9 years ago

    Because financial/ legal benefits cant be deprived from any couple. Regardless of their orientation.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    Freedom of expression

    More money for marriage industry

    One less thing against lgbt people and the youth growing up which has a very strong effect on them. Knowing at the moment, the world is not ok with them wanting to show their love and happiness. If you're not an lgbt youth- you don't know what its like.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 9 years ago

    One argument could be that you cant control the way you feel.

  • 9 years ago

    Marriage is a union between a man and a woman, therefore "homosexual marriage" is an oxymoron.

    However if two gays want to cohabitate and make it "legal" there should be no reason they can't. As long as everyone remains free to treat that union per their conscience then more power to them.

    Source(s): Nature; reality
  • Liam
    Lv 4
    9 years ago

    such a bone question im only saying this for the 2pts

    Edit i don't care if you dislike my answer im sick of this question getting asked! it shouldn't be asked because it should have nothing to do with anyone but the people that love each other no one should need to justify what they do

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.