Same-sex marriage debate Essay Example for Free

Same-sex marriage debate seeThe world is constantly changing and evolving. It isnt possible to stop this from happening, but it is possible to stand up for what is chastely even out and for what isnt. And now, we are faced with what objet darty people feel is the inevitable evolution of marriage legalizing man marriages. Not allowing homosexual marriages to be recognized by the govern custodyt and to be legal would prevent changing a fundamental institution, would prohibit breaching the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and would prevent unthinkable consequences. Marriage has been around for as coarse as anyone can remember. And after all this time, it has changed very little in the eyes of the law. Every major(ip) religion and culture has embraced marriage as a unique relationship between a man and a cleaning lady. One of the only times marriage was altered, was when no-fault divorce was legalised. No-fault divorce was introduced, and it has proven to be a complete disaster for children and often for the adults involved. Statistics now show that 53% of marriages end in divorce. And now, we find ourselves shimmer yet again with an institution that is foundational to the well-being of our children and a healthy society.The same argument once make in support of no-fault divorce, This will non affect good marriages and healthy families, is now being do in support of gay marriage. Yet we confound no credible evidence to prove that holdfast our marriage laws again will be any less problematic for children and society than was no-fault divorce. The painful lessons we have learned as a result of no-fault divorce should stop this process cold in its tracks.To fundamentally change an institution whose worth has been proved over thousands of years and in hundreds of cultures risks unintended and unexpected consequences. It is with illimitable caution that any man ought to venture upon pulling tear an edifice which has answered in any permissible degree f or ages the common purposes of society.Secondly, it has been argued that prohibiting homosexuals to marry would breach the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter was modified in 1981 with the following head teacher Whereas Canada is founded upon the principlesthat recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law. With such an acknowledgement, how could the acceptance of same-sex marriages even be considered? Time and again, the word of honor clearly states and demonstrates Gods position on homosexualitySodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of homosexuality (Gen 1820-21 195-7, 13)Homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 69-10)Those who practice homosexuality are called perverted men (Jdg 1922)The penalty under the Old Testament for homosexuality was death (Lev 2013)It is abominable, whether committed by men or women (Ro 126-27)Three Ontario judges stated that prohibiting gay couples from marrying violates the Charter The Charter, acknowledging the supremacy (ie. dominion, preeminence) of God strikes down any notion that same-sex marriages can be accepted in Canada.Thirdly, the Marriage Act of Ontario, when speaking of a marriage mentions a man and wife. How does a same-sex couple fit this comment? The same document outlines a list of people whom a man cannot marry (grandmother, mother, daughter, sister, granddaughter). Likewise, a list of people whom a woman cannot marry is provided (grandfather, father, son, brother, grandson). If the Marriage Act permitted homosexual marriages, why is a man not restricted from marrying his grandfather, father, son, brother, grandson? And likewise, why is a woman not restricted from marrying her grandmother, mother, daughter, sister, granddaughter? It is for the simple reason that same-sex marriages do not fall in spite of appearance the framework of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Marriage Act of Ontario, or or so importantly, Gods holy word.To change the definition of marriage w ould be to change the nature of marriage to recommend that, the full impact of the change moldiness be understood. And that impact must be considered not just at the individual level, but most importantly at the societal level, and not just for the present, but also the future.Definition (and language in general) create human reality. We dont just change words, we change the nature of an entity when we redefine it. Definitions are frames that we place on events, concepts or circumstances, in found to give them meaning we frame reality with language in order to find meaning in that reality. Those in the gay community who want same-sex marriage are right to seek meaning in their relationships and to want to have that meaning publicly recognized. They are wrong, however, to try to do it by co-opting the institution of marriage. The institution of marriage cannot function in that way without being deformed and destroyed.