research paper about Gay Marriage should not be prohibited.

Part 1

Gay marriage has been emerging issue in the current era. This assignment focuses on providing the debate on the gay marriage whether it should be allowed or not. On the proposing side the gay marriage is the argument of equality. Proponents who are for gay marriage postulates that equal rights must mean equal rights. Civilized society should not discriminate the on the basis of race, religion, sex or sexuality and refusal of marriage rights. The gay and the heterosexual have legitimate rights to property, taxes inheritance among others that are enjoyed by a common citizen (Laura R. Olson,James T. Harrison, 2013). As a result, denying them their rights is homophobia. At the same time, gay marriage works so other people should let it be. There are gay people who love each other and want to commit to each other the same way ordinary couples commit to each other. Also, illegalizing the gay marriage is a altering the freedom of choice. The state should have no say on how adults conduct their lives. Therefore, if two people love each other and want two have get married, they should be allowed to do so irrespective of color, religion, nationality or sex. When the government interfere with private lives, they compromise the right to freedom (Heather Wyatt-Nichol and Lorenda A. Naylor, 2010).

On the other hand, the opposing side proponents postulate that the marriage is for a man and a woman. To change this aspect will go against the natural law and overlook the role of family and marriage in holding the society together. The legalization denies the marriage core role of procreation. The legalization of the same sex marriage will result to weakening the rights of heterosexual families. Again, the gay marriage undermine religion views. To legalize the same sex marriage will result to the contravening the beliefs and erode the major role of religion that is played by religion in moral context. Christians, Jews and Islam have all pointed out that the gay marriage is opposite of their teachings and will of God.in addition, all rights have limits. Therefore, gay marriage should not be allowed (Laura R. Olson,James T. Harrison, 2013).

For gay marriage:

The right for equality

The marriage is works, everyone should be allowed to practice

It is a freedom of choice

Against the gay marriage:

Marriage is for a man and a woman

It undermine religion

All rights have limits so this applies to the Gay marriage.

Conclusions for the Debate

The right for equality should be accorded to every individual, therefore, this should be extended to gay marriage. At the same time, if the gay marriage works then it should be permitted to everyone who feels that they are favored by the type of the marriage. Additionally, the freedom of choice should be respected. This will result to accepting the gay marriage. On the other hand, argument against gay marriage is that marriage belongs to man and a woman. Again, it undermine the religion and the plan of God. Lastly, all rights have limits so this applies to the Gay marriage (Laura R. Olson,James T. Harrison, 2013).

Basic premises

The basic premises in the argument for gay marriage is include the right for equality. This argument postulate that prohibition of gay marriage restricts the individual liberty and autonomy. This right to make decisions that affect one’s life is infringed. Besides, the right to freedom is affected when the gay marriage is prohibited. The love between two people who have the feeling of marriage should be allowed to exercise their freedom. On the other hand the basic premises against the gay marriage suggest that Opponents of same-sex marriage contend that the purpose of marriage is procreation and provision of a stable family life in the best interest of children, therefore the state has a legitimate purpose in regulating marriage .In addition, it undermine the religion .This is highly related with people’s opinions. Therefore, when any of the laws are a conflicting with the religious myths it is deemed unaccepted. This goes in contrary to the will of God when he created the first two beings (Reginald Williams, 2010).

Conclusions

In 2003 the Superior Court of the State of Arizona upheld the prohibition of same-sex marriage in Standhardt v. Superior Court (77 P.3d 451, 206 Ariz. 276). The court ruled that a fundamental right to marry does not include the right to marry someone of the same sex, reasoning that simply because other language in Lawrence indicates that the Court did not consider sexual conduct between same-sex spouses a essential right, it would be irrational to deduce the quoted language as identifying a essential right to enter a same-sex marriage. This was to support the opinion that all rights have limits (Reginald Williams, 2010).

Part 2

The following are merits of each side. For the gay marriages, the merits for right for equality is a strong opinion, this is because the constitutions grant rights to every individual. This rights belongs to every individual and they are not granted by the state. As result, prohibiting the gay marriage infringe the freedom of conscience, religion, belief and opinion. The marriage works and everybody should be allowed to be in it. Marriage is viewed as a successful institution and many people as possible can open it .Since time in memorial, the institution of marriage have seen couples seal their love and solemnly bind themselves together in a marriage. This bond between the two is viewed as a holy bond. This strengthen the society .The law recognize that gay people do exist and love each other and they want to commit their lives to each other through marriage in the same way as the couples. Therefore, courts should ensure that they consider this. However, many countries have not permitted gay marriage. Lastly, on the proposers of gay marriage, prohibiting gay marriage infringe the right of freedom. The right to freedom of choice. When gay marriage is not embraced, the participants of the gay people are deprived their rights which is contrary to the tot the status quo .two people who love each other and want to marry, regardless of the sex, nationality, sex of their partner should be allowed. The love marriage should be based on choice. When the state regulate the personal choice it infringes the individual freedoms. It is worth noting that the rights have limits (Reginald Williams, 2010).

On the opposing side of gay marriages, the marriage is for man and a woman. The critics are of the opinion that marriage is a union of man and a woman. Therefore, any change will be against the law of nature and undermining the mandate and the role played by the marriage institution. The legalization of gay marriage does not encourage the central role of marriage which is procreation. The civil partnerships available for gays which advocate for gays rights however, the gay marriages means the changes in the terms mother and father. This is because the gays marriages are meant to weaken the heterosexual families and marriages. In addition, it undermine religion. The gay marriage counter many people religious beliefs. This is because religions stipulate that the man and a woman are the ordained couples compared to gay marriages. To legalize the gay marriage it will offend deep beliefs and moral bedrock in society. All religious beliefs in the world have always opposed the gay marriages. However the right to opinion should be granted (Reginald Williams, 2010).

Utilizing the argument evaluation skills the proponents who are against the gay marriages win the debate due to arguments that are referenced. Again, proponents against the gay marriages have argued without incorporating cognitive biases and heuristics compared to proponents who are for gay marriages. This has been evident in arguments such as marriage is ordained to be of man and a woman affair. Also, it conflicts the beliefs of religion and the limitations of human rights (Laura R. Olson,James T. Harrison, 2013).

Conclusion

Gay marriage has been emerging issue in the current era. The arguments for gay marriage include the right for equality, the marriage is works, everyone should be allowed to practice and it is a freedom of choice. On the argument against gay marriage: Marriage is for a man and a woman, It undermine religion all rights have limits so this applies to the Gay marriage.

References

Heather Wyatt-Nichol and Lorenda A. Naylor. (2010). Liberty and Equality: In Defense of Same-Sex Marriage (132). University of Baltimore.

Laura R. Olson,James T. Harrison. (2013). Religion and Public Opinion about Same-Sex Marriagen (123). Wendy Cadge, Bowdoin College and Harvard University.

Reginald Williams. (2010). Same-Sex Marriage and Equality (11). Springer Science+Business Media B.V.