The term homosexuality appeared to have been used for the first time in the year 1869. In 1871, Germany government criminalized against such act. By 1947, an Institute for Sex Research was incorporated in Indiana. In the year 1961, a Vatican said that anyone involved with homosexuality was not eligible to take religious vows. Later in 1972, a church in Netherlands argued that gays and lesbians could also serve as pastors.
The United Methodist Church in U.S.A. voted against the issue of “compatibility between the church and homosexuality”. Ever since, there have been a number of advances on the subject of gay affairs. In a good number of States, prejudice of groups based on their sexual orientation has been forbidden. This document aim to argue that validation of homosexuality has a harmfully influence on the community ethical fabric or cause discrepancy in relations.
Majority of spiritual associations have based their opinions on holy scripts and argued that justification of homosexuality has led to erosion of ethical values within the American people. This moral approach has played enormous position throughout political movements where people values have superseded the aspiration to decriminalize homosexuality particularly in school boards and sacred unions.
In their point of view, spiritual groups argue that marriage is sanctified union and therefore holy. They as a result argue that God created man and bespoke him to fill up the world through his union with the female partner and not people of same sexual category (Ayers and Brown 15).
Secondly, opponents of homosexuality advice that marriage amid people of identical gender does not hold any logic as it lack rationale and purpose. They emphasize that marriage between man and woman has a primary objective of giving birth. Conversely, marriage between people of the same gender does not have this objective. On top of siring, marriage of similar sexual category can be done for the main intention of material goods allotment and companionship.
The anti-homosexuality bodies argue that these can be accomplished without marrying. There are regulations that would contentedly attend to the matters of material goods sharing and heritage (Sherman 14). These urgings nevertheless, have not been able to persuade pro-homosexuality bodies. It is based on this that I personally oppose legalization of marriages of the same sex.
Initially, they dispute that homosexuality is normal and inherited. Whilst anti-homosexual lobbies dispute that this is a conduct acquired from the setting, science has confirmed that homosexuality is an innate issue (Garber 16).
Le Vay’s 1991 research showed that there are structural distinctions within the mind of homosexual men and their heterosexual complements. According to the research, it was acknowledged that interstitial nuclei located in the anterior hypothalamus of individuals’ brain demonstrated structural diversity in the two categories of men.
In homosexuals, the structure was minor in comparison to the heterosexual counterparts. He affirmed that the dimension of this structure had a responsibility to tackle in determining person’s sexual orientation. This implies that homosexuality is not a behavior acquired from the surrounding but an inborn occurrence. It is therefore crucial that such groups are given sovereignty as any other groups with hereditary deformations that lead to body disabilities.
This is according to science but still ethically, marriage of the same sex should not be allowed and instead, the concerned parties should be counseled and guided to avoid such immoral behavior. In brief, policy makers should structure a set of laws that will strongly discourage people engaged or those who have intentions getting involved in such disgusting inhuman behavior and the whole community in general from strongly leaning towards homosexual tendencies.
Most people say that homosexuality is an innate and irreversible progression that cannot be downcast by restrictions. This might not hold true considering the fact that in the beginning homosexuality was not there. Mostly, legal prices are imposed on these acts to depress persistent involvement in this act (Kamiat 230).
This serves the purpose of dispiriting people from appealing to this act. It is very true that an infant with homosexual genes can be transformed to a normal human being. A biological study suggests that once exposed to new environment old characteristics in human beings extinct with time. On the contrary, some scientists argue against this. Anyway, let us believe these genes do not even exist considering that these characteristics did not portray themselves in the beginning of the world, and so they have been learnt later.
In brief, it has been argued by conformists and spiritual bodies that homosexuality should not be endorsed. As far as discrimination neglects right to those who have already conformed to homosexuality, we should think of living in holy and sacred society. We should not join hands to support such dirty acts that soil the moral standards that God put in the beginning of this world. Indeed, we should recognize that God teachings weigh more than people’s own decisions and practices that emerged the other day (Borg 36).
This will enhance respect and dignity in today’s society. As a result, we shall live in a blessed world and escape wrath of the Lord our Father. Therefore, a man should marry a woman and sire children, and as a result fill the world as God said. Therefore marriage of the same sex should not be legalized.
Ayers, Tess, and Paul, Brown. The essential guide to gay and lesbian weddings. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1994. Print.
Borg, Marcus. Reading the Bible again for the first time: Taking the Bible seriously but not literally. New York: Harper Collins, 2002. Print.
Garber, Marjorie. Vested Interests: Cross-Dressing and Cultural Anxiety. London: Routledge, 1992. Print.
Kamiat, Arnold. “A Psychology of Asceticism,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 23 (1928): 223-231.
Sherman, Suzanne. Lesbian and gay marriage: Private commitments, public ceremonies. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1992. Print