Gay Marriages Make Them Legal: Rebuttal Essay

Thomas Stoddard’s Gay Marriages: Make Them Legal, has some valid points, but I am not convinced nor persuaded to agree that gay marriages should be legalized. Stoddard begins with the sad story of a gay couple. Karen Thompson and Sharon Kowalski who exchanged vows that were not recognized by the government, and were living with each other in a committed relationship until Kowalski was struck by a drunk driver, which left her paralyzed and unable to communicate more than a few words at a time (para 2). Thompson sought legal guardianship over her partner, which was denied, when Kowalski’s parents opposed the petition and were granted sole guardianship. Once Kowalski’s parents received guardianship over her they moved her to a nursing home 300 miles away from her partner and forbade all visits between the two (para 3). The story of Thomas and Kowalski is a sad story that no couple, gay or straight, should have to endure; however, I don’t believe legalizing gay marriages would have given their story a different outcome. Case in point: Terri Schiavo who was diagnosed by doctors as being in a persistent vegetative state stayed alive for several years via life-support despite the request of her husband to remove the support and allow Terri to expire arguing that his wife would not want to be kept alive by artificial means. Michael Schiavo petitioned the court to have his wife’s feeding tube removed; he was opposed by Terri’s parents Robert and Mary Schindler who argued she was conscious. The court ruled in Michael’s favor and had the feeding tubes removed only to have it reinstated after the Schindler’s filed an appeal. The appeal process went on from 2001 to 2005. After all attempts of appeals the court system upheld the original decision to remove the feeding tubes; 13 days later Terri died. Despite being the husband of Terri Schiavo Michael had to go through 14 appeals, 5 lawsuits, and numerous motions, going all the way up to the Supreme Court to have his wishes for his wife set forth. Being the legal husband of Teri made no difference, before he could allow his wishes to be set forth he had to do his due diligence in court. If Thompson would have sought all legal options and exhausted all of her appeals, it is possible that her case could have had a different outcome. Having their marriage legalized may not have given her the outcome she petitioned the court for, thus weakening the reasons behind legalizing gay marriage. The United States of America is based on Christian principles and in this country marriage has been defined as a religious and legal commitment between a man and a woman and we should uphold those beliefs. Homosexual marriage should not be encouraged, it confuses children about gender roles and weakens the definition and respect for the institution of marriage. If gay marriage were legal we would have to ask ourselves if it is in the best interest for the entire county. Stoddards has a point when he argues â€Å"The decision whether or not to marry belongs properly to individuals – not the government (para 6). Most would argue that the government does have the right to say what is legal and what is not. However, not all that is legal is moral, especially if it promotes moral deterioration of American society. For instance even though abortion is legal does it mean it’s moral? Our country should focus on things that are moral whether than the things we as a people feel are fair. If we legalize gay marriage, is that not a gateway for other immoral behavior? If that is the case, how then, do we expect to bring up future generation with morals and family values? Children learn about expectations of gender roles from their parents first, then society. It is difficult for parents to teach the importance and traditions of the family when the confusion of homosexual marriage is thrust upon them. Legalizing gay marriages will not set a good example for future generations. It will confuse our youth and encourage unhealthy behavior. For instance, an issue analysis done by Family Research Council advocating Faith, Family, and Freedom showed that the life expectancy at age twenty for gay and bisexual men is eight to twenty years fewer than for all men (FRC). In addition the Suicide Prevention Resource Center estimates that between thirty and forty percent of gay, and lesbian youth depending on age and sex groups, have attempted suicide and are four times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people (SPRC). With such statistics we should not allow our children to grow up believing that living a homosexual lifestyle is a healthy choice. If we do, it is possible these statistics will rise causing a larger percentage of our youth to die young. According to Stoddard â€Å"A married person can share in a spouse’s estate when there is no will. She is typically entitled to the group insurance and pension programs offered by the spouse’s employer, and she enjoys tax advantages† (para 5). Although these advantages are important, they are not as important as keeping our youth alive with good family morals and values. Lisa Schiffren in â€Å"Gay Marriage, an Oxymoron† had a valid point when she argued â€Å"Same – sex marriage is inherently incompatible with our culture’s understanding of the institution. Marriage is essentially a lifelong compact between a man and a woman committed to sexual exclusivity and the creation and nature of offspring. For most Americans, the marital union – as distinguished from other sexual relationships and legal and economic partnership – is imbued with an aspect of holiness (Schiffren 754)†. Allowing immoral acts that go against our country’s beliefs and value does not instill morals in our youth. Instead it will lead to our youth growing up with the mindset that anything goes and that there are no standards to live by; if they believe in it – it is justified. In order to preserve the values of the United Sates we, as a nation should guide our youth to follow our Constitution which is built on Christian faith. Although Stoddard and other gay rights advocates may argue that the government has no say in who shall marry and that same sex marriage will represent equality in all – they are not looking at foundation of this country. â€Å"Society cares about stability in heterosexual unions because it is critical for raising healthy children and transmitting the values that are the basis of our culture (Schiffren 724)†. Stoddard’s argument to legalize gay marriages based on allowing homosexuals to have the right to enjoy the benefits and laws of marriage is not strong enough to have the country’s values and beliefs compromised. We have to set the standard for our future; not doing so could lead to a nation where laws and values are not valued. Our youth would grow up confused on gender roles, not valuing the country’s Christian principles, and this country’s definition of marriage being defined as a religious and legal commitment between a man and a woman. Although we all have the right to commit ourselves to whomever we choose, one should not expect our country’s values and laws to change because he/she chooses to live outside of them. Works Cited Lane, Diane. â€Å"The Whole Terri Schiavo Story.† WND. N.p., 24 Mar. 2005. Web. 31 Jan. 2013. â€Å"The Negative Health Effects of Homosexuality.† The Negative Health Effects of Homosexuality. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Feb. 2013. â€Å"Suicidal Behavior among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth.† SPRC. American Association of Suicidology (AAS), 2012. Web. 04 Feb. 2013. Barnet, Sylvan, Hugo Adam. Bedau, and Thomas Stoddard. â€Å"Gay Marriage Make Them Legal.† Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999. N. pag. Print Schiffren, Lisa. â€Å"Marriage: What Is Its Future.† Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings. By Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Adam. Bedau. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2002. 723-24. Print