, Research Paper Being Gay is More than Okay The written piece of Dennis O’Brien, “Against Gay Marriage – I: What Heterosexuality Means,” discusses the idea that we must first look at the societal definition of marriage before we can pose judgements on homosexual marriages. O’Brien then continues on to denounce same-sex marriages, claiming they are not accepted into religion and in the values of Americans.
, Research Paper
Being Gay is More than Okay
The written piece of Dennis O’Brien, “Against Gay Marriage – I: What Heterosexuality Means,” discusses the idea that we must first look at the societal definition of marriage before we can pose judgements on homosexual marriages. O’Brien then continues on to denounce same-sex marriages, claiming they are not accepted into religion and in the values of Americans. Our society needs to accept all marriages and support the couple who is lucky enough to find a mate.
The article points out that if two people were to really be in love with each other, then genuine commitment would not need, “the sanctions of a judge or priest,” (O’Brien, 662). O’Brien also states that couples are reluctant to wed because it, “destroys the honesty and commitment of true love,” (662). If marriage destroys true love, then why do we as a society look forward to uniting with another person? Marriage is the ultimate joining of two people who want to cement their love to each other and proclaim to live side by side for the rest of their lives.
The author questions whether, “homosexual marriage would harmonize with out our underlying values,”(663). He then compares a homosexual marriage to polygamy, in the sense that they have both received “constitutional scrutiny,” (663). This may be true, however they cannot be compared because the products that come out of each relationship are very different. In homosexuality, a couple shares their lives together as one, providing each other with their full attention. Polygamy, on the other hand, leaves many women to deal with feelings of an unrequited love from their husbands, who also have devoted their lives to multiple women.
Another point that O’Brien makes is that heterosexuality is very important for continuing human evolution (663). This is true, except for the stress that he places on heterosexual people reproducing. He implies that all male-female relationships produce children, which is not a valid statement. (663). There are marriages between a man and a woman where no children are born, whether it is by decision or for medical reasons. These couples are still living content lives without children, so is it not logical that a homosexual relationship can occur? Not only do same-sex marriages exist, but also they can be fulfilling without having children.
The last point that the author makes is the aspect of religion. Many religious cultures do not believe in homosexual marriages (664). If a homosexual couple wishes to be together, the last thing that keeps them apart should be religion. What matter is living a blissful life together, not what society thinks, religion says, or others preach. Marriage is a link that two people create, and are in essence, sacrificing all ties that would hold them back from achieving happiness.
Homosexuality is apparent, and homosexual marriages are becoming more frequent. Why can’t we be delighted for a couple that has crossed paths and created a bond in which they can live in total euphoria? When we discover that a heterosexual marriage is planned, even between two people we don’t even know, society instantaneously congratulates the couple and wishes them the best. Let’s congratulate marriages of all sexes for finding a lifelong partner, instead of deciding who they can marry.