same sex marriage essay brainly tagalog

Pangkat Apat

Taglay ng pangkat ang liwanag at kasaganahan ng bansang sinilangan., posisyong papel: same sex marriage.

Same-sex Marriage sa Pilipinas: Katanggap-tanggap ba?

Isinulat ni: Abellaneda, Crisanto Amancio, Elmadin Carim, Alaysa

Ang same-sex marriage ay pagpapakasal ng isang dalawang tao na magkapareho ang kasarian, babae o lalaki. Isang mainit na isyung kinakaharap sa kasalukuyang taon sapagkat mayroong nagaganap na pag tanggap sa same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas. Ang same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas ay hindi dapat gawing legal dahil sa tatlong kadahilanan na nagmula sa law of god, law of nature, law of man. Walang simbahan, pope, o imam, gobyerno, pangulo, at mga tao kahit anumang lahi, kulay, o pananampalataya ang may gustong ipatupad ang same-sex marriage bilang legal o katanggap-tanggap sa Pilipinas.

Marami ang tututol kung gagawing legal ang same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas. Una, ang law of God na naririnig at nakikita ng mga tao na itinuturo galing sa iba’t- ibang simbahan na ang pagpapakasal ay sa pagitan lamang ng lalaki at babae katulad ng Roman Catholicism na may 80.6 poryentong populasyon , Iglesia ni Cristo na may 2.45 poryento , Islam 5.6 porsyento, Dayawism na may pinakamalit ng porsyento at iba pang relihiyon na hindi sumasang-ayon sa same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas. Walang simbahan ang may gustong ipatupad ang same-sex marriage bilang isang legal na batas sa Pilipinas dahil sa mga nabanggit na mga relihiyon kung saan hindi sang-ayon sa nasabing isyu. Pangalawa, law of nature kung saan sa tunay na buhay o sa katotohanan ang pagpapakasal ay sa pagitan lamang ng lalaki at babae na hindi maitatanggi ng sangkatauhan. Ibig sabihin, hindi maaaring mangyari ang pagpapakasal sa pagitan ng lalaki at lalaki o bisebersa. Pangatlo, law of man kung saan nasasakop ang Family Code of the Philippines na nagsasabing ang pagpapakasal ay katulad rin ng law of God at law of nature. Noong Marso, ipinalabas ang resulta ng Standard survey tungkol sa bilang ng taong tumututol sa same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas at pito mula sampong mga Filipino ang hindi sumasang-ayon sa nasabing isyu. Bilang dagdag sa mga nasabi, ang pope o imam naman mismo ang nagtuturo at nagpapatibay sa law of God tungkol sa pagpapakasal, gobyerno ang gumawa ng mga batas at patakaran para sa ikabubuti ng mga mamayan, si pangulong Rodrigo Duterne mismo ang nagsabi na ang same-sex marriage ay labag sa law of God, nature, at man kaya ang sabi hindi dapat gawing legal ang same-sex marriage. Naiintindihan ng nakararami kung bakit may mga taong gustong ipatupad ang same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas, ang mabigyan ng ekwalidad ng pagpapakasal, karapatan, at walang discriminasyon kaya sabi ni Atienza na gumawa ng anti-discrimination bill ang mga may awtoridad para sa mga bakla, tomboy, bisexual, at transekswal upang mabigyan ng respeto at walang mangyayaring diskriminasyon, at kung mayroon man handa na ang mga parusa na matatanggap ng taong lumabag sa batas subalit kung pagpapakasal ang pag-uusapan magkakaroon ng hindi pagkakaunawaan, pagkakasundo at pagsalungat sa mga banal na kasulatan. Mula sa relihiyong Islam, “kung ang isang Muslim ay hindi sumunod sa mga kautusan ng Allah, sa kabilang buhay siya ay mapaparusahan”. Mula rin sa bibliya ng relihiyong katoliko, “Homosexuality is both immoral and contrary to nature.” Hindi dapat ipatupad ang same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas sapagkat naniniwala ang mga tao na ang hindi susunod sa salita ng Panginoon ay isang imoral at may kasunod na kaparusahan sa kabilang buhay. Hindi kagustuhan ng mga Filipino na maparusahan at maging imoral ang mga kapwa Filipino.

Ang same-sex marriage ay ang pagpapakasal sa pagitan ng lalaki at lalaki o bisebersa. Isa sa mga isyung kinakaharap ng mga tao sa Pilipinas. Ang same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas ay hindi dapat gawing legal dahil sa tatlong kadahilanan. Una, law of God na nagsasabing ang pagpapakasal ay sa pagitan ng lalaki at babae. Ang mga iba’t-ibang relihiyon katulad ng Roman Catholisism, Iglesia ni Cristo, Islam, Dayawism at iba pa ay tumututol sa nasabing isyu sapagkat hindi katanggap-tanggap sa Panginoon ang nasabing pagpapakasal. Pangalawa, law of nature na kung saan ang katotohanan ng pagpapakasal ay sa pagitan lamang ng lalaki at babae. Pangatlo, law of man na nasasakop nito ang Family Code of the Philippines, pito mula sa 10 ang tumututol sa same-sex marriage. Ang pope o imam, pangulong Rodrigo Duterte ,at gobyerno mismo ay isa sa mga tumutol sa pagpapatupad ng same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas. Ang mga nakakatanda ay dapat maging isang modelo ng mga kabataan. Paano na kaya sususunod ang mga kabataan sa mga banal na kasulatan ng Panginoon na nagtuturo ng kabutihan kung mismo ang mga nakatatanda ang sumasalungat nito? Kaya, ang mga Filipino ay dapat magbukas ng puso’t isipan para sa kinabukasan ng kabataan at ng bansang Pilipinas.

Mga babasahing tinukoy: Romero, Alexis. Duterte Against Same-Sex Marriage in Philippines. Philstar ,(n.d.). Web. 20 March 2017. Retrieved from .

Cepeda, Mara. Same-Sex Civil Carriage Bill May ‘Divide’ House – Minority Lawmakers. Rappler, 4 October 2016. Web. 4 October 2016. .

Conde, Carlos. Philippines Should Adopt Same-Sex Marriage. Human Rights Watch, (n.d.). Web. 20 March 2017. .

Hojilla, Kate Aubrey. Same-Sex Marriage and its Legal Hindrance in the Philippines. Business World Online, (n.d).Web. 15 June 2017. .

Metropolitan Community Church Quezon City. Holy Union. MCCQC, (n.d.). Web. 11 August 2017. .

Cruz, Oscar. Same Sex Marriage. CBCP, (n.d.). Web. 12 September. 2017. .

Abbey, Ruth. Duterte Opposes Same-Sex Marriage. Sunstar, (n.d.). Web. 20 March 2017. .

Gamil, Jaymee. Sorry, Gays, Duterte is No Longer for Same-Sex Union. Inquirer, (n.d.). Web. 22 March 2017. http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/882749/sorry-gays-duterte-is-no-longer-for-same-sex-union .

Wikipedia. LGBT Culture in the Philippines. Wikipedia, (n.d.). Web. 27 July 2017 . .

Wikipedia. LGBT Rights in the Philippines. Wikipedia, (n.d.). Web. 19 August 2017..

Wikipedia. LGBT in Islam. Wikipedia, (n.d.). Web. 11 September 2017. .

Tan, Oscar Franklin. The Best Argument Against Same-Sex Marriage. Inquirer, (n.d.). Web. 15 July 2015 .

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

SAME SEX MARRIAGE: PABOR KA BA?

References : http://www.dissentmagazine.org http://www.bartebly.com/topics/Same-sex-marriage/ http://www.lawteacher.net/same-sex-marriage-debate/ http://www.123helpme.com/against-same-sex-marriage/

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy .

The best argument against same-sex marriage

FILIPINOS, SPORTING #LoveWins hashtags and slapping rainbows onto their Facebook profile pictures, have been swept up in the euphoria over the US Supreme Court decision declaring same-sex marriage a fundamental human right. Law professors are heartened to see Justice Anthony Kennedy’s poetic Obergefell decision shared in social media. However, we must also read the powerful dissents and ask why we might prefer that our unelected justices decide this sensitive issue instead of our elected legislators.

Inquirer 2bu quoted teenagers opining that anyone with the capacity to love deserves to have his/her chosen relationship validated. Obergefell’s logic is equally simple. Forget “substantive due process,” “decisional privacy” and “equal protection.” It takes the simple premise that human liberty necessarily goes beyond physical liberty, and includes an unwritten right to make fundamental life choices. Choosing a life partner is one such fundamental choice and the decision of two people to formalize their relationship must be accorded utmost dignity.

The typical arguments against this simple idea are so intellectually discredited that Obergefell no longer discussed them. (My Philippine Law Journal article “Marriage through another lens,” 81 PHIL. L.J. 789 [2006], tried applying them to bisexual and transgender Filipinos.)

One cannot solely invoke religious doctrine, even if thinly veiled as secular “morality.” Religious groups may confront this issue but not impose their choices on others. Their often vindictive tone contrasts sharply with Kennedy’s, and increasingly alienates millennials who revel in individuality. Those criticized as religious zealots should at least strive to be up-to-date, more sophisticated religious zealots.

The most common argument, procreation, is also the easiest to refute. Philippine Family Code author Judge Alicia Sempio-Diy wrote: “The [Code] Committee believes that marriage … may also be only for companionship, as when parties past the age of procreation still get married.”

Another argument reduces marriage to a series of economic benefits and suggests a “domestic partnership” system to govern same-sex couples’ property and other rights. This parallels having separate schools for white and black children and claiming they are equal because both have schools. It implies that some relationships so lack dignity that they must be called something else.

Protecting the “traditional” definition of marriage is too subjective. Obergefell reminds that traditional definitions evolve and once prohibited interracial and accepted arranged marriages, and “it is unrealistic to conclude that an opposite-sex couple would choose not to marry simply because same-sex couples may do so.”

Recent last-ditch arguments alleged harm to children. No party to Obergefell contested that same-sex couples may build nurturing families after adopting or tapping medical advances to produce babies with related DNA. Prohibiting same-sex marriage harms children by making such families unstable, as only one parent may legally adopt and have rights in relation to a child.

With all these discredited, the Obergefell dissents simply raised that marriage is so central a social institution that it is better redefined by democratic process than unelected judges. Proponents may consider opponents homophobic, bigoted, narrow-minded religious zealots, but none of these disqualifies one from being a citizen. Chief Justice John Roberts argued that proponents should have relied on how popular opinion was rapidly shifting in their favor than ending all debate by court order.

Justice Antonin Scalia decried how the US Constitution was turned into a “fortune cookie” in a “judicial Putsch” that declared a radical unwritten right. Roberts cautioned that the first cases to use similar doctrine upheld slavery and struck down labor regulations in the name of laissez faire economics. Although invoking human rights is not subject to an election, it is wise to consult society in defining these, and Obergefell stressed the lengthy public debates the United States experienced at every level.

One thus asks why an instant judicial solution is more appealing than backing Akbayan Rep. Barry Gutierrez’s proposed same-sex marriage bill. The Philippines has not had serious public debate given how we recently focused on reproductive health, and our high court has not even explicitly recognized “decisional privacy.” Further, the petition to legalize same-sex marriage recently filed at our high court is blatantly deficient.

The petition (like the anti-RH petitions) does not even identify a client. There is no actual Filipino same-sex couple, unlike the real Mr. Obergefell who sought to be named the spouse on his partner’s death certificate after their deathbed wedding. This violates the most basic rule that judicial power may only be used in an “actual case” and the high court should have instantly thrown out the no-case petition (like the anti-RH petitions). The petition also has glaring errors (like the anti-RH petitions). It invoked the Philippine privacy decision Ople vs Torres, which involved information in government databases and has nothing to do with the “decisional privacy” of US same-sex marriage debates. Even liberals should be hard-pressed to support this lest they be intellectually inconsistent and validate the anti-RH petitions’ worst features.

Any citizen lacking the patience to back Gutierrez’s bill has every right to short-circuit democracy by seeking an order from unelected judges. One hopes our high court insists that it be sought properly.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

React: [email protected] , Twitter @oscarfbtan, facebook.com/OscarFranklinTan.

Fearless views on the news

Disclaimer: Comments do not represent the views of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments which are inconsistent with our editorial standards. FULL DISCLAIMER

© copyright 1997-2024 inquirer.net | all rights reserved.

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Pananaw sa same sex marriage: Lalim at pagdalumat

2022, International Journal of Research Studies in Education

Related Papers

Danica Lorraine Garena

Ang pag-aaral na ito ay isinagawa upang mabatid ang pananaw ng mag-aaral sa paggamit ng mga sariling komposisyon ng panitikang pambata at antas ng pang-unawa. Sa pag-aaral na ito binibigyang katugunan ang mga sumusunod na katanungan: Ano ang pananaw ng mga tagasagot sa paggamit ng mga Sariling Komposisyon ngPanitikang Pambata bataysa nilalaman,layunin,disensyo/istilo, kasanayan/gawain; Ano ang antas ng pang-unawa ng mga tagasagot sa paggamit ng mga Sariling Komposisyon ng Panitikang Pambata batay sa Pang-unawang Literal at Pang-unawangKritikal; May makabuluhang kaugnayan ba ang pananaw ng mag-aaral sa paggamit ng mga Sariling Komposisyon ng Panitikang Pambata at Antas ng Pang- unawa sa Pagbasa; Ang pamamaraang palarawan-correlation ang ginamit ng mananaliksik upang makalap ang mahalaga at makatotohanang impormasyon na kinakailangan sa pag-aaral. Ang istatistikal na pamamaraan na ginamit sa pagsasaliksik ay weighted mean at standard deviation para sa pananawng mga tagasagot sa Mga Sa...

Kritike: An Online Journal of Philosophy

Rodrigo Abenes

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Dr. Ronald Wright

The Normal Lights

Layunin ng pananaliksik ang makabuo ng mga lunsarang aralin at gawaing angkla sa MELCs o Most Essential Learning Competencies sa primaryang antas. Pangunahing metodo ang disenyong palarawan at pagbuo ng mga lokalisado at kontekstuwalisadong may temang katutubo, kabuhayan, kalinangan, kapaligiran, at diskursong kasarian na angkop sa pagtuturo sa anyong modyular, harapan, o blended. Ginamit ang sarbey at panayam sa mga piling kalahok. Lumabas sa pag-aaral na epektibo ang mga aralin kapag nakadikit sa karanasan, kaligiran, at interes ng mga mag-aaral. Ang mga kontekstuwalisadong aralin na pinagtibay sa konteksto ng pandemya at bagong kadawyan o new normal ay mainam na gamiting sandigang kaalaman sa kasanayan at kahusayang komunikatibo sa Filipino at iba pang kaugnay na disiplina.

Stochastics and Stochastic Reports

A.I. Shawky

Debajit Sarma

Mansa Gurjar

Family Practice News

Jennie Smith

Folia Linguist

Yves Duhoux

Language and Linguistics

Belghis Rovshan

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications

Diego Maldonado

Christos Roumpos

Sodality: Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan

Muslim Tadjuddah

Erik Bulten

Studia Mathematica

Angela A Albanese

Yael Perlman

Astronomy & Astrophysics

Balaji Seela

Cirugía Plástica Ibero-Latinoamericana

daniel calderon

Ellan Spero

Chemical Physics Letters

Kuomei Chen

Journal of the Geological Society

Daniel Gomez

Helen Guzhñay Rivera

Cancer management and research

Daniel Lopez

BMC Public Health

Il Segno e le lettere. Saggi

Andrey Toporkov

F1000Research

Geomorphology

Thierry Winter

World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Mechanical, Aerospace, Industrial, Mechatronic and Manufacturing Engineering

Esra Aleisa

Potential Analysis

Bernt Oksendal

American journal of medical genetics. Part A

Sultana Faradz

Diseases of the Esophagus

Helene Engstrand Lilja

Katarína Petriščáková

Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing

Arshad Islam

Revista Brasileira de Plantas Medicinais

Luis Guilherme Lappe

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Same Sex Marriage Essay for Students

Introduction

The same-sex marriage has sparked both emotional and political clashes between supporters and opponents for years. Although it has been regulated through law and religion in many countries around the world, legal and social responses often range from celebration to criminalisation of the pair.

Essay No - 1

Marriage equality – importance of same sex union.

Back in 2018, the Supreme Court of India passed a watershed judgement that was ordained to go down the archives of the country’s history. In spite of the majoritarian prejudices prevalent in India directed towards the LGBT community, the apex court revoked the draconian and out-dated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. 

This Section, in typically vague and diplomatic terms, belittled homosexuality and criminalised intercourse that goes against the “laws of nature”. It was incorporated into the Indian Penal Code under the British Raj in 1861, and it took the Indian judiciary system 70 years since independence, to abrogate the law and decriminalise homosexuality. 

Nonetheless, the landmark decision was met with euphoria from its proponents, especially the activists who fought for the cause for more than a decade, wrangling with society and courts to attain equality in the eyes of the law. Even though a marriage equality essay is far from sight in a time when it is legal to marry the person one loves irrespective of their gender identity or sex, the decision by Supreme Court portends its occurrence. 

Equality in Marriage

Equality in marriage is an idea, which propagates that all marriages notwithstanding whether it is a Sapphic marriage or gay marriage or heterogeneous matrimony are equal and should enjoy similar rights and status in society.

Unfortunately, our society’s construct is such that we grow up with the idea that only a man and woman can be bound in matrimony. And while doing so, we overlook the multitudes of individuals that associate with different sexual preferences and gender identities. 

While the western world marches toward inclusive societies, where individuals are treated as equals irrespective of their sexuality or gender, we still are in the embryonic stages towards such acceptance. 

If one searches for same-sex marriage essay or statistics, one will find that support for marriage equality in countries like the USA hovers above 60%, a data presented by Pew Research Center. And if one were to rummage through the same statistics for India, it is a dismal 18%, according to a poll by Mood of the Nation (MOTN) in 2019.

Importance of Same-Sex Marriage

Because no change is appreciated until it contributes to the betterment of society in one way or another, proponents of an inclusive society have long contested its importance in same-gender marriage essays and discourses.

We are an overpopulated country and encouragement of marriage equality and an increase in same-sex matrimonies would lead to lower population growth. At the same time, it might witness a growth in adoptions of orphans, which is a significant move towards a holistic society. 

And last but not the least it would be an encouraging shift towards adherence to the laws of human rights, which dictates that no human should live under discrimination, fear, or oppression. 

The seeds of prejudice prevalent in our society, however, will not change overnight. Our traditions and social construct are vastly different from those of western societies. A change in mindset is a process that might take decades and even centuries. 

Nonetheless, the change should begin somewhere. And awareness that every human is equal and their preferences and choices about who they love and marry should not be a ground for discrimination is quintessential to that change. 

Essay No - 2

Same-gender marriage: a threat or blessing for the reunion of two people.

Marriage or wedlock is the cultural union of two people for a lifetime. Considered an integral part of one’s life, it involves both legal and social formalities performed by the two families in concern. Besides, it also comprises regulations and obligations to be followed by the spouses and their children as well as their immediate family members.

However, there have been instances where marriage equality essays have been spoken of by many. These are instances where marriage between couples of the same gender is considered inappropriate. Nevertheless, the global society is evolving and people are coming out of the closet more often than ever before.

How Does the World Perceive?

Most communities are becoming liberal in terms of being more accepting in nature. People by and large are taking a stand to abide by their sexuality. It is no more a matter of shame that has to be kept hidden or shut behind the doors.

Multiple same sex marriage essay has come up sighting the incidents where the couple were accepted by their respective families. In addition, the act of legalization of same-sex marriage has been going on since the past two decades with great vigour.

Countries like the Netherlands, Spain, and Belgium had legalised it in the wake of the 2000s, while other countries such as Canada, South Africa, and Norway followed suit in the upcoming years.

The marriage equality essay has been in the limelight because more people are opening up about the benefits and importance of such marriages in today’s world. The reasons that have fuelled such a dramatic change can be listed below as -

People can be themselves and do not have to try hard to get accepted for who they are.

They are proud of both their individuality as well as sexuality and do not have to wear a mask.

They can plan for the future instead of having to succumb to societal pressure.

Same-sex couples now have the opportunity to live with their loved ones happily, without having to take cover. 

The spread of the same gender marriage essay has been a saviour for many who were not aware of the changes that are taking place all around the world. It has not only made the LGBTQ community aware but also encouraged them to evaluate themselves and take the plunge to raise their voices too. They can now take a stand for themselves and feel relieved that they are not discriminated against anymore.

What is the Scope in the Future?

Although a significant part of the world including countries like Taiwan, Germany, USA, etc. have been able to match the steps with the advancing surrounding; there is still a section who has not. Even now, marriage equality essays and other online content create backlash.

Therefore, it is essential that more people come forward and join hands to the cause of being united in terms of accepting the bond between people. 

Essay No – 3

Same-sex marriage - the changing attitude of modern society.

Most religions and cultures accept that marriage is not a trivial matter but is a key to the pursuit of happiness. However, they still openly criticise the practice of same-sex weddings. Fortunately, the stigma related to homophobia and LGBTQ community is slowly but surely lessening. Better education, introduction to different cultures, and an open mindset played a critical role in this development. 

Let’s discuss the changing attitude of today’s society and the benefits a culture might enjoy in this same-sex marriage essay.

The History of Same-Sex Marriage

During the mid-20 th century, historian Johann Jakob Bachofen and Lewis Henry Morgan made systematic analyses of the marriage and kinship habits in different cultures. They noted that most cultures expressed support towards a heteronormative form of marriage that revolves around union between opposite-sex partners. However, all these cultures practised some form of flexibility while following these ideals. 

Scholars like historian John Boswell often declared that same-sex unions were recognised in medieval Europe, but the most notable changes were introduced during the late 20 th century. 

An Accepting Society

A more stable society was created over the years, with a better understanding of each other and acceptance for the different. As the culture opened its arms to learn about others, it also learned about minority groups such as the LGBT community. Similar to racial equality, or the equality movement for women, growing acceptance of that community ultimately made the commune much more stable. 

Many consider that same-sex unity will only benefit the homosexual community. However, it leaves a much more profound impact on the overall society. To begin with, it will reduce homophobia by a significant margin. Acknowledging a homosexual relationship will also reduce hate crimes in countries like India. There are many research papers and marriage equality essays available that show how communities that allow an individual to choose their partner to enjoy a significantly less rate of crime. 

The Economic Boost

An unlikely benefit of same-sex marriage and a compassionate society towards homosexuals is the economic boost. For one, the wedding and marriage industry is the biggest beneficiary of same-sex marriage, as it increases their customer base by a significant margin. It also allows several business providers to service them, and helps the travel and tourism industry by boosting the number of honeymoon goers.

For example, businesses in New York enjoyed almost 260 million dollars boost within a year when same-sex marriage was legalised. Similar effects were also found in other countries.

Even though India still hasn’t shaken the stigma attached to a same-sex relationship, somewhat modern society is slowly learning to accept the diversity of human nature. With the help of the government, activists, and hundreds of individuals creating and posting blogs, same-gender marriage essays on the internet, society is gradually becoming an understanding and nurturing entity for everyone.

FAQs on Same Sex Marriage Essay for Students

1. Which countries have legalized same-sex marriage and when?

With the advancement in the thought process of people, many countries have passed laws in favor of same-sex marriage, thereby legalizing it in their countries. The first countries to legalize same-sex marriage before 2010 were the Netherlands who legalized it in 2001, Belgium legalized it in 2003, Canada and Spain legalized it in 2005, South Africa in 2006, Sweden and Norway in 2009 and Iceland, Argentina, and Portugal legalized same-sex marriage in 2010. Later on, Denmark legalised it in 2012, and countries like Uruguay, New Zealand, France, and Brazil in 2013, Ireland, Luxembourg, and the United States in 2015, Colombia in 2016,  Malta, Germany, and Finland in 2017, Australia in 2018 and Ecuador and Austria in 2019. The recent country to legalize same-sex marriage is the United Kingdom. Thus, now people have started accepting the idea of same-sex marriages across the world.

2. What is the importance of same-sex marriage and why should it be legalized?

As the world is progressing we all must understand that each one of us is a human being and before labelling us with our caste and love preference, we must learn to respect each other. In this progressing era as more people with same-sex preference are coming up it has become more important to accept and legalize same-sex marriage because of the following reasons:

It will give people a chance to be themselves and enjoy their own individuality.

It will make people understand that loving a person of the same sex is not wrong or abnormal.

It will teach people that it is better for people to spend their lives with someone they love and not with the person whom they don’t even like.

This will make this place a much happier space to be in.

It gives people with homosexuality a hope of a happy life.

3. What is the status of same-sex marriage in India?

Same-sex marriage in India is still not encouraged. In India, neither the laws are lenient nor the people are broad-minded to accept it happening around them. The legal and community barriers never give these people a chance to prove themselves. Indian society is not very welcoming to changes that are different from the customs and culture they have practised till now. Thus, any change in these cultural laws gives rise to an outburst of anger in the country which makes legalising these issues even more sensitive and challenging for the law. India still needs time to get accustomed to the concept of same-sex marriage. However, not knowing about the concept is a different thing, and completely opposing it is different, therefore, awareness about such issues is very necessary for the developing countries so that people can first understand the pros and cons of it and then either accept it or reject it. Not only in India, but in other countries also, the idea of same-sex marriage is not accepted because they think it is against their religion. People opposing the LGBTQ community to get the right to marry their lovers take away the very basic human right of such people. There has been a long-lasting war for the members of the LGBTQ community for their rights. Although there have been some positive results in recent years, for example, the end of Section 377, which criminalizes homosexuality. However, India still has a long way to go in terms of the LGBTQ community and their rights.

4. What approaches can be used to legalize same-sex marriage?

Same-sex marriage is currently not taken in kind words by the people but slowly and steadily the things are changing and people are able to change their perspective with respect to the LGBT community. Legalizing same-sex marriage in a country like India where a number of religions and customs are practiced is really difficult. Therefore, few approach switch can help legalize same-sex marriage without hurting any religion are that the existing laws are interpreted in such a way that they legalize same-sex marriage, LGBT can be regarded as a different community which has customs of its own that permits same-sex marriage, making amendments in the Act itself or all the religions can individually interpret their marriage laws in such a way that same-sex marriage becomes in accordance with their religion.

5. Briefly discuss your view on same-sex marriages?

Same-sex marriage refers to the marriage of the same sex which is similar to heterosexual marriages in terms of rituals and proceedings. Same-sex marriages should not be ashamed of and are justified because after all love knows no boundaries. The community must be made aware of this concept so that they can appreciate and celebrate the union of two loving souls without considering their gender. The community as a whole must attempt to legalize and accept same-sex marriage with respect to the laws, religion, and customs of the country. In the coming years, there is a ray of hope that same-sex marriages will also be celebrated just like normal marriages in India.

MyInfoBasket.com

Free Quality Online Learning Materials

• Pagkilala sa Pambihirang Pagkakakilanlan ng Lahing Pilipino
• Alab ng Kultura: Mga Musika at Sayaw ng Lahi na Pambihirang Ipinagmamalaki ng mga Pilipino
• Tunay na mga Biyaya: Mga Kawanggawa sa Pamayanan na Bunga ng Pananampalataya
• The Last Words of Jose Rizal: An Insight into the Final Moments of the National Hero
• Who was Jose Rizal? Discover the Life and Legacy of Jose Protacio Rizal Mercado y Alonso Realonda

Same Sex Marriage Debate: Reasons For and Against

Homosexual relationships are increasingly gaining acceptance in other countries, but are still banned in the Philippines. Some explain that the traditional marital set-up defines the fundamental, cross-cultural institution that healthily provides ‘normal parents’ to children.

Same-sex marriage advocates however argue that legalizing same-sex unions would be good not only for gay people, but also for society as a whole, since society fundamentally supports loving relationships regardless of the people’s gender orientations and preferences.

So generally speaking, should same-sex marriage be legalized?

These are some of the reasons used by those who propose the legalization of same sex marriage:

1. Same-sex marriage does not hurt the society or anyone in particular. Denying this form of marriage is a case of minority discrimination.

2. A legalized same sex marriage can be a big help to orphanages. Same sex partners’ inability to procreate would probably bring them to adopting orphans.

3. Today, homosexuality is already an accepted lifestyle. Many productive and highly-respected people in the society (such as leaders, filmmakers, and other artists) belong to the gay community. It’s about time to positively sanction their relationships.

4. Is not love the most important thing that should matter in marriage? Once same-sex marriage is legalized, the political and financial benefits that apply to man-woman marriages will also be enjoyed by genuinely loving gay couples.

Oppositely, those who take the traditional stance offer these reasons against same-sex marriage:

1. Same-sex union may traumatically confuse children especially about gender roles, procreation, and societal expectations. For children’s sake, same-sex marriage must be banned.

2. Though becoming rampant, gay lifestyle is not something to be encouraged as studies show that it leads to a much lower life expectancy, psychological disorders, and other personal and societal problems.

3. Same-sex union and building a family out of it are not biologically natural. Same-sex couples cannot naturally produce children through their union.

4. The proposal will weaken the sanctity, honor, and prestige of marriage as a fundamental institution. Same-sex marriage will destructively weaken many traditional family values that serve as fabrics of a stable society … continue reading

©  Jensen DG. Mañebog /MyInfoBasket.com

SA MGA MAG-AARAL : Maaaring ilagay ang inyong assignment/comment dito sa comment section ng Moral Standards and Non-Moral Standards (Difference and Characteristics)

ALSO CHECK OUT: Reasoning and Debate: A Handbook and a Textbook  by  Jensen DG. Mañebog

IMPORTANT: TO STUDENTS (and their friends/relatives): For your comments NOT to be DELETED by the system , pls SUBSCRIBE first (if you have not subscribed yet). Thanks.

===== To post comment, briefly watch this related short video:

==== For your COMMENT, use the comment section here: Comments of RATIONAL STUDENTS

Share this:

• ← Mandatory Drug Test for Students Debate: Reasons For and Against
• Curfew Debate: Reasons For and Against →

Privacy Policy

• COVID-19 Full Coverage
• Cover Stories
• Ulat Filipino
• Special Reports
• Personal Finance
• Other sports
• Pinoy Achievers
• Immigration Guide
• Science and Research
• Technology, Gadgets and Gaming
• Chika Minute
• Showbiz Abroad
• Family and Relationships
• Art and Culture
• Health and Wellness
• Shopping and Fashion
• Hobbies and Activities
• News Hardcore
• Walang Pasok
• Transportation
• Missing Persons
• Community Bulletin Board
• GMA Public Affairs
• State of the Nation
• Unang Balita
• Balitanghali
• News TV Live

Ilang lider ng Kamara, hindi sang-ayon sa pagpapatupad ng same-sex marriage

Tinanggihan ng ilang pinuno ng House of Representatives nitong Linggo ang ideya na kilalanin sa pamamagitan ng batas ang same-sex marriage sa Pilipinas.   Ayon kay House Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II, hindi pa posibleng ipatupad ang gay marriage sapagkat karamihan sa mga Pilipino diumano ay "generally conservative."   “I am of the opinion that at the moment, or even in the near future, it’s a no-no situation for same-sex marriage in the Philippines,” ani Gonzales.   Sinang-ayunan naman ito ni House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. sapagkat ang Pilipinas umano ay "not yet ready" sa pagpapatupad ng same-sex marriage.   Hindi rin pabor si Belmonte sa pagpasa ng batas para rito dahil nais niyang panatalihin ang depinisyon ng kasal sa ilalim ng Family Code ng Pilipinas, kung saan nakasaad na ang "marriage" ay isang kontrata sa pagitan ng babae at lalaki.   Nagkomento ng mga lider ng Kamara matapos maglabas ng pahayag si United States President Barack Obama sa kanyang pagsuporta sa gay marriage.   Ayon kay Obama, dapat tratuhin ng patas ang lahat ng pares. Sa kabila nito, hahayaan ni Obama ang mga estado na bumubuo ng US na magdesisyon kung ipapanukala ang same-sex marriage sa kani-kanilang lehislatura.   Kasalakuyang hindi pa legal ang gay marriage sa Pilipinas.   Implikasyon ng pagpapakasal   Samantala, si Pangulong Benigno Aquino III naman ay naniniwalang maaaring magpakasal ang mga gay couple, ngunit mayroon siyang alinlangan sa aspeto ng pag-adopt ng mga gay couple ng anak.   "I don’t think I’m ready to tackle that fight right now. But the perspective… it is their choice," sina Aquino sa kanyang talumpati sa Asia Society Forum in New York noong Setyembre 2011 nang bumisita siya sa Amerika. "Normally I would say, you’re adults, you should be able to do whatever you want so long as it doesn’t hurt anybody else. But if the next step is we want the right to adopt, then, I would be in a dilemma," dagdag niya. Ang kapakanan ng bata ang matimbang para kay Aquino. "My priority would be looking after the child who has a very tender and impressionable mind," ayon sa Pangulo.   Inakusahan naman ni Gabriela Women's party-list Rep. Luzviminda Ilagan si Aquino na “detached from the needs of his people" sa hindi niya paglalahad ng kanyang pwesto sa isyu ng gay marriage.   “He [Aquino] is two-faced, saying he is pro-people, but bows to the pressure of the conservative Catholic Church,” kanyang inihayag sa hiwalay na talumpati.   Co-author ang mambabatas sa dalawang kontrobersyal na panukala na tinutulan ng Simbahang Katoliko: House Bill 1799 o ang panukalang pagpapatupad ng divorce sa Pilipinas, at House Bill 4244 o ang reproductive health (RH) bill. Isang taon nang nakabitin ang dalawang panukalang ito.   Naghain ng mosyon laban sa diskriminasyon base sa sexual orientation at gender identity (House Bill 1483) si Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Teodoro Casiño noong Nobyembre sa House committee on women and gender equality. — Amanda Fernandez/ELR, GMA News

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

An Argument Against Same-Sex Marriage: An Interview with Rick Santorum

The debate over same-sex marriage in the United States is a contentious one, and advocates on both sides continue to work hard to make their voices heard. To explore the case against gay marriage, the Pew Forum has turned to Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and now a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Sen. Santorum is also the author of the 2005 book It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good , in which he makes the case for promoting families anchored by a married mother and father.

A counterargument explaining the case for same-sex marriage is made by Jonathan Rauch, a senior writer at The National Journal .

Featuring: Rick Santorum , Senior Fellow, Ethics and Public Policy Center; Former U.S. Senator

Interviewer: David Masci , Senior Research Fellow, Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

In this Q&A: Why oppose gay marriage? The “go-slow” approach Child welfare Christian values

Question & Answer

Gay rights advocates and others say that gay and lesbian people want to get married for the same reasons that straight people do – they want to be in caring, stable relationships, they want to build a life and even start a family with someone else. Why shouldn’t they be able to do this?

See, I think that’s the foundational flaw with this whole debate. The law is as it has been for 200-plus years, and so the burden is on them to make the persuasive case as to why they should be married, not just for their benefit but for what the impact is on society and marriage as a whole, and on children.

I would argue that the gay community has not made the argument. They may have made the argument as to why they want it, but they have not made any arguments as to why this is beneficial for society. They have not made any argument – convincing or otherwise, that I’m aware of – as to what the impact would be on heterosexual marriages and what the impact would be on children.

They have no studies. They have no information whatsoever about what it would do to the moral ecology of the country, what it would do to religious liberty, what it would do to the mental and physical health of children – nothing. They’ve made no case. Basically the case they’ve made is, “We want what you want, and therefore you should give it to us.”

So you’re saying that advocates of same-sex marriage are not seeing the big picture?

Yes. I have a book that was written a few years ago called It Takes a Family . In that book I have a chapter on moral ecology, and I explain that if you go to the National Archives, you will come to a section that has, as far as the eye can see, rows and rows and rows of environmental impact statements, because we have laws in this country that say before you go out and you put in a bridge across a creek, you have to go out and see whether what you’re doing is disturbing the landscape there.

Yet when it comes to something that I happen to believe is actually more important than a particular plot of land – the entire moral ecology of our country, who we are as a people, what we stand for, what we teach our children, what our values and ethics are – people argue that we can build the equivalent of a strip mall without even thinking about what those consequences are.

Some people in favor of gay marriage have argued for a “go-slow” approach, acknowledging that we’re in largely unknown territory and that a majority of Americans are not yet comfortable with same-sex marriage. Does that attitude allay any of your fears?

No. They want the convenient accelerator of the courts to put this in play, and then they want the judicious temperament of the American democratic system to govern it. I don’t think you can have your cake and eat it too. Same-sex marriage advocates are not going to state legislatures, except in some cases for civil unions. They are using the courts.

If the courts are going to be your accelerator, then get ready for a ride. And if the courts ultimately say, “Marriage must be allowed between anybody and anybody,” the gay rights advocates are not going to say, “Well, you’ve gone too far.” No, I think the go-slow argument is there to make us feel better, but it doesn’t hold water.

Another argument made by gay rights advocates is that with or without marriage, gay families are already a widespread reality. They point out that we already have gay couples living together, some with children. And they ask: Isn’t it better that they be legally married to each other, if for no other reason than for the benefit and the welfare of the children?

The answer is no – because of the consequences to society as a whole. And again, those are consequences that they choose to ignore. What society should be about is encouraging what’s best for children. What’s best for children, we know, is a mother and a father who are the parents of that child, raising that child in a stable, married relationship, and we should have laws that encourage that, that support that.

What you’re talking about with same-sex marriage is completely deconstructing marriage and taking away a privilege that is given to two people, a man and a woman who are married, who have a child or adopt a child. We know it’s best for children and for society that men and women get married. We know it’s healthier. We know it’s better for men. We know it’s better for women. We know it’s better for communities.

What we don’t know is what happens with other options. And once you get away from the model of “what we know is best” and you get into the other options, from my perspective, there’s no stopping it. And also from my perspective, you devalue what you want to value, which is a man and woman in marriage with a child or children. And when you devalue that, you get less of it. When you get less of it, society as a whole suffers.

Do you feel confident that if same-sex marriage became the norm in our society that we would get less traditional marriage?

The answer is yes, because marriage then becomes, to some degree, meaningless. I mean, if anybody can get married for any reason, then it loses its special place. And, you know, it’s already lost its special place, in many respects, because of divorce. The institution of marriage is already under assault. So why should we do more to discredit it and harm it?

Stanley Kurtz of the Ethics and Public Policy Center has written extensively about this, about what the impact is in countries that have adopted same-sex marriage. We have, in fact, seen a decline in the number of marriages, a delay in people getting married, more children being born out of wedlock and higher rates of divorce. None of those things are good for society. None of those things are good for children.

But can you lay these changes at the feet of same-sex marriage?

Yes, I think you can lay them at its feet. Kurtz notes that the marriage rate in the Netherlands was always actually one of the lowest in the EU. And once same-sex marriage was put in place, it broke below the line.

As a person who has positioned himself as a defender of Christian values, why is gay marriage particularly opposed to those values?

Well, the laws in this country are built upon a certain worldview, and it is the Judeo-Christian worldview. And that worldview has been expressed in our laws on marriage for 200-plus years. Up until 25 years ago, we would never have sat here and done this interview. It would have been beyond the pale. And so it is clearly a dramatic departure from the Judeo-Christian ethic that is reflected in our laws that say marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.

When you look ahead, do you feel optimistic that your side in this debate will ultimately prevail?

What I’ve noticed about this debate is that fewer and fewer people are stepping up and taking the position I’m taking because they see the consequences of doing so. I don’t think there is an issue that is a tougher issue for people to stand up against in American culture today than this one, both from the standpoint of the mainstream media and the popular culture condemning you for your – they can use all sorts of words to describe you – intolerant, bigot, homophobe, hater. The other side takes it personally. And so it makes it very difficult for folks to stand up and argue public policy when the other side views it as a personal, direct assault on them. So it’s very, very hard for me to be optimistic when we have a battle of ideas and one side is universally hammered for being intolerant bigots and the other side is enlightened and tolerant – which I think is false, but it is the pervasive attitude.

We know that the American public doesn’t approve of same-sex marriage, but they are uncomfortable about it because, again, the public perception is if you feel that way, you’re a bigot or a hater. And if the culture continues to send that message, if our educational system sends that message, which it does, you know, eventually the culture will change and people’s opinions will change.

The push back is what most people know: that mothers and fathers bring something unique. I mean, I have six children. I know that two mothers would not be able to give to my children what a mother and a father can give to my children. For instance, my daughter’s relationship with men is, in many respects, formed by her relationship with me. There are volumes of evidence showing that if little girls don’t have a father, it impacts their ability as adults to bond with men in healthy relationships.

What do we know, really, about children raised by same-sex couples? We’re into, in many respects, an unknown territory. There is already a difficult environment for children in America today, at least from the traditional Judeo-Christian perspective. So I think this is a fight worth fighting, even if it’s not a popular fight.

This transcript has been edited for clarity, spelling and grammar.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Religion & Social Values
• Same-Sex Marriage

8 in 10 Americans Say Religion Is Losing Influence in Public Life

How people around the world view same-sex marriage, the pope is concerned about climate change. how do u.s. catholics feel about it, across u.s. religious groups, more see decline of marriage as negative than positive, 5 facts about religion in south and southeast asia, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy