current technology: Considerations FOR same sex marriage ? Reason & Science Society

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Considerations FOR same sex marriage ? Reason & Science Society

On the 18th Sept we hosted a debate on legalizing same-sex marriage.?

Here is one RSS member?s considerations FOR.?

Marriage has been a traditional social institution in multiple forms predating reliable recorded history and our current limited definition by a considerable period of time.? Some of these traditions included marriages of same sex couples which were overwritten by a limited Judaeo-Christian derived definition conceived in a period of extreme homophobia.? That tradition should now be overwritten by an egalitarian one that recognises a relationship on its own merits. ?The truth is that marriage was a legal contract used for commercial gain and/or power consolidation between the upper classes. ?It progressed into an expression of love that provides legal rights for those in it; it is simply time that it progresses further.

Gay marriage equality parallels that of the struggle of interracial couples in USA in the 1960?s.? Many of the arguments against selectively extending this right to include interracial couples are the same, including it being unnatural and children are worse off in interracial families.? All are based on a combination of irrational fear, logical fallacies, appeals to tradition and empty claims about the public good. ?The data does not back any of these arguments, if it did the opponents to gay marriage would be able to produce independent studies supporting their point but just the opposite is true. The legal option obtained by opponents to the current bill has been thoroughly debunked. ?There is no risk that ANY individual or Church will be forced to recognise or hold same sex unions, just as they are not forced to hold or recognise interfaith or racial unions now.

The average gay relationship is identical in every way to the average straight relationship with the sole exception that the couple cannot have heterosexual sex, so cannot produce children.? If we are going to legislate policy on the bases of what type of sexual acts a couple preforms in the privacy of their own bedroom we are on very shaky ground. Additionally many straight relationships do not produce offspring, either by choice or by infertility problems; if this was to be the reasoning then these relationships should be excluded from marriage as well. ?Furthermore, gay couples have the same desire to be parents and do so via the same means as many couples with an infertility barrier.? There has been no evidence that they are unfit parents. If marriage between loving couples provides the best environment for children then we should not be punishing those with gay parents.

Same sex couples share their lives as completely with each other as straight couples do and with that comes the need for legal protection. Civil unions were a step forward but they are not a copy/paste of all the rights and privileges of marriage nor are they recognised globally. ?Even if they were, ?separate but equal? is not a message we want to send. ?Due to all of this it is in the public good to be egalitarian unless we can find an objective reason why we should not.? Harm is caused by discrimination while there has been no evidence presented of actual harm in extending marriage to be inclusive of gay couples.