The American culture is rapidly changing and so is the moral code. The government is able to make changes to the laws to accommodate the people. For example, Baker and McConnell sued Nelson for denying marriage application because the Minnesota law on marriage doesn’t mention anything of gender (“Same-Sex Couple”, 2008). Before gay marriage was legal there was no mention of gender on the law of marriage. For this reason, legalizing gay marriage should not have been an argument.“”But, for better and for worse, traditional marriage has already been destroyed,” said E.J. Graff, “and the process began long before anyone ever dreamed of legalizing same-sex marriage.””(“How Marriage” 2012). Marriage was already becoming more and more corrupt with
…show more content…
However, they do not take into account that same-sex marriage goes against Americas cultural beliefs. When it comes to the topic of same-sex marriage, most people will agree that homosexuals take advantage of the leave-way the government gives them. For example, people should not have their tax dollars used to support gay couples when they believe it is wrong. According to Sprigg (2011), one of the main goals of gay couples is to take advantage of social security which is the biggest government entitlement program today. Some homosexuals are wanting to get more benefits from the government just because they feel self entitlement. This is a growing problem because people are getting mad that their tax dollars are going to benefit homosexuals. In addition, Spriggs (2011), also says that gay couples are demanding for any kids that are raised by homosexuals to be eligible for benefits when one spouse dies. While this is outrageous that the kids should get benefits just for their parents being gay, it is also unfair to the rest of society that is raising kids in a heterosexual home. In conclusion, Sprigg goes on to add that if the gay couples are allowed the full legal statues of marriage, then any employer who chooses not to grant benefits to homosexuals for a variety of reasons, then they will be …show more content…
For centuries America has had the same definition for marriage because it followed the moral code instilled into every person. Cristofaro & Wilkinson (2003), argues that, gay relationships are deviant and immoral, and only traditional marriages can fulfill Gods’s perfect plan for the reproduction of the human race. Gay marriage is a very controversial issue because of how immoral it is. Cristofaro & Wilkinson (2003) acknowledges that any political leader, no matter what their religion is, who is committed to promoting the common good of society should be following suit (para 10). The leaders of this country need to step up and realize all of the downfalls that legalizing gay marriage brings. In addition, Cristofaro & Wilkinson (2003), agrees that homosexual marriage is in no way similar or even follows God’s plan for marriage and family, marriage is holy and gay acts go against the natural moral law. God’s plan for marriage has always been to be between a man and a woman and to have a family together. Same-sex marriage goes against every moral law there is. Legalizing same-sex marriage will be one of the biggest downfalls for the American
However, they do not take into account that same-sex marriage goes against Americas cultural beliefs. When it comes to the topic of same-sex marriage, most people will agree that homosexuals take advantage of the leave-way the government gives them. For example, people should not have their tax dollars used to support gay couples when they believe it is wrong. According to Sprigg (2011), one of the main goals of gay couples is to take advantage of social security which is the biggest government entitlement program today. Some homosexuals are wanting to get more benefits from the government just because they feel self entitlement. This is a growing problem because people are getting mad that their tax dollars are going to benefit homosexuals. In addition, Spriggs (2011), also says that gay couples are demanding for any kids that are raised by homosexuals to be eligible for benefits when one spouse dies. While this is outrageous that the kids should get benefits just for their parents being gay, it is also unfair to the rest of society that is raising kids in a heterosexual home. In conclusion, Sprigg goes on to add that if the gay couples are allowed the full legal statues of marriage, then any employer who chooses not to grant benefits to homosexuals for a variety of reasons, then they will be …show more content…
For centuries America has had the same definition for marriage because it followed the moral code instilled into every person. Cristofaro & Wilkinson (2003), argues that, gay relationships are deviant and immoral, and only traditional marriages can fulfill Gods’s perfect plan for the reproduction of the human race. Gay marriage is a very controversial issue because of how immoral it is. Cristofaro & Wilkinson (2003) acknowledges that any political leader, no matter what their religion is, who is committed to promoting the common good of society should be following suit (para 10). The leaders of this country need to step up and realize all of the downfalls that legalizing gay marriage brings. In addition, Cristofaro & Wilkinson (2003), agrees that homosexual marriage is in no way similar or even follows God’s plan for marriage and family, marriage is holy and gay acts go against the natural moral law. God’s plan for marriage has always been to be between a man and a woman and to have a family together. Same-sex marriage goes against every moral law there is. Legalizing same-sex marriage will be one of the biggest downfalls for the American