Gay marriage is the marriage between two persons or males who are of the similar
biological identity or gender. In the current 20th and 21st century a number of same-sex or
homosexual unions have come to legalization. However, people have their own contradictory
beliefs, views and reasoning's when it comes to gay marriage. It is notable that god created a man
and woman to combine together and elicit vows in the correct manner, but yet in some nations it
is legal to get marry with the person of same sex, while some stations are still argumentative on
this issue. Same sex marriage should not be legalized because of the chief reason that it alters the
conventional meaning of marriage as between a male and a female and will additionally
deteriorate an endangered institution.
Legalizing of gay marriage is merely a sneaky slope that may direct to interspecies and
polygamous marriages, as well. Gay couples can though have children by adopting them, but
homosexual marriage will not be in the interest and benefit of children as for the proper
development of a child both father and mother are requisite, and thus gay marriage should not be
legalized. Accepting gay marriage to some extent is fair, but legalizing gay marriage will
somehow expand and promote homosexuality, which will be detrimental for the society.
A. Gay Marriage will weaken the Marriage Institution
Sarkadi (2008) has mentioned that same sex marriage decreases the extent of
heterosexual marriage in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden and will continue to decrease the ratio
in other countries too. Kurdek (2005) has performed a lot of extensive research in the field of
homosexual relationships, and also asserted that “Perhaps the most important ‘bottom-line’
question about gay and lesbian couples is whether their relationships last.” (Kurdek, 252). He
has concluded that it is no wrong to mention that gay and lesbian couples break up their
relationships more regularly as compared to heterosexual couples, in particular heterosexual
couples having children.
It is significant to mention that if gay marriage is lawful, then the proportion of
homosexual couples who will stay together for a life span will all the time be inferior to the
proportion of heterosexual pairs that do so; however the proportion of heterosexual pairs
showing lifetime devotion will also turn down, and will damage the society eventually. It is
pertinent that marriage between same sex relationships is a self-disagreement, and if the union of
gay couples will be legalized, then wedding itself all over the country will get damaged (Sarkadi,
Since, the marriage institution is in so much mess by now; the populace cannot afford to
harm it any further. Marriages have for all time been an agreement, between a male and a female,
which is by its character well-ordered toward the reproduction and children as well as the
harmony and happiness of the couples. However, the promoters of gay marriage recommend
something, which is complete dissimilar; a union between two men. In actuality, this refuted the
self-apparent physiological, biological, and emotional dissimilarities amongst male and female
which discover their complementarity in marriage. It will also refute the fundamental and most
important reason of marriage: the continuation of the human race and the development of
children for societal or nation development (Deborah, 574).
Further, it is notable that gay couples should be accepted as a subject of social justice, but
they should not be authenticated by the state or should not be determined as the type of marriage.
It is imperative that regularizing such abnormal behaviours and associations will harm society in
the long period of time. The notion that gay marriage is incorrect due to the rationale that gay
pairs are one way or another abnormal is not a lot openly stated, but this idea affects other points
of view and lies behind a lot of people’s unconstructive outlooks about homosexuality generally
For a lot of people, heterosexual associations are the rule, in society as well as in nature
Therefore, homosexual connections are anomalous and not natural and due to this reason, they
should not be authenticated by the state and should be not be determined as a type of marriage. A
basic and simple meaning is that heterosexual marriages are natural because this is what we
discover in nature, but homosexual marriages are not found due to which they are abnormal and
should not be legalized by society (Biller, 45).
Moreover, marriage is for reproduction and it should not be expanded to the couples of
same sex or gay couples as they cannot give birth to children together. In this manner, permitting
gay marriage would merely further transfer the reason of marriage from procreation and
developing children to only adult fulfilment. It is pertinent to elucidate that it is by children only
that sexual connections become significant to society, and valuable to be considered cognizance
of by a lawful organization. Homosexual couples can by no means deliver a child with both her
biological father and her biological mother (Kurtz, 27). In opposition to the pro gay marriage
disagreement that some heterosexual couples cannot produce children or do not want to have
children even, but in those cases also there is still the prospective to give birth to children.
Apparently, unproductive different sex couples at times give birth to children, and
medical improvements may permit others to reproduce in the future. Still, different sex pairs who
do not want to have kids are biologically competent to have them and might alter their minds
(Lerner, Robert and Althea, 110).
B. Gay Marriage is not in the Interest of Children
It has been mentioned by Lerner, Robert and Althea (108) that both mother and father are
crucial for the healthy and proper growth of children. It has been found that fathers bring down
behavioural issues in boys as well as emotional problems in girls, improve their cognitive
development, and diminish their delinquency. On the other hand, a mother helps in enhancing
sensitivity, love and care amongst children. It is noteworthy that children advantage from both
male and female parent. Current medical researchers have confirmed genetically driven
dissimilarities between men and women and those primary differences aids in elucidating why
fathers and mothers fetch exclusive features to parenting, which cannot be imitated by the other
In simple words, mothers and fathers are not interchangeable or cannot be substituted.
Two men both be good fathers, but neither of them can be a good other to a child. Single sex
parenting; be it from a sole parent or homosexual couples, withdraws children of the complete
assortment of parenting provided by dual-sex pairs. Only families with both mother-fathers
provide children the chance to nurture relationships with a parent of the same, and at the same
time of the opposite sex. Associations with both sexes from the beginning in life make it simple
and more comfy for a child to connect with the sexes later on in life. On the whole, engaging in a
connection with a male and female parent augments the probability that a kid will have
flourishing communal and romantic connection during his or her life-span (Kurtz, 29).
Additionally, recent research on children nurtured by homosexuals is scientifically
inconsistent as well as tremendously limited, however a few of them in fact points out that those
kids are at high risk for a range of unconstructive outcomes. Other research discovers that
homosexually reared children will probably experiment sexually, undergone sexual confusion,
and employ in bisexual and homosexual behaviour themselves.
However, broad research discloses that children who afterwards employ in non-
heterosexual deeds, they will more probably undergo from psychiatric chaos, mistreatment,
alcohol and drugs, try suicide, go through domestic violence and sexual stabbing, and are at
higher threat for chronic sicknesses, as well, like AIDS, and short lives. It is in interest of the
child to be developed under the pesusuaion of his natural mother or father. This rule has also
been established by the number of apparent problems confronted by a lot of children who are
orphans or are also developed by a sole parent, any relative, or by a foster parent (Ranalli, B2).
The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex
“marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural
mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with
him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model. It has also been found
in studies that children brought up by homosexuals will probably engage in homosexuality
themselves as a lot of worldwide research makes it clear that homosexual behaviour is mainly
induced by the environmental. Particularly, family and/or social determinants, and unautocratic
environments which insist homosexual behaviour, play fundamental environmental roles in
developing homosexual behaviour (Ranalli, B2).
It is likely that if the society allows gay marriage or same sex marriage, then it has to
permit other forms of non-traditional weddings too. The simple legal logic is that if barring gay
marriage is prejudiced, then prohibiting polyamorous marriage, polygamous marriage, and any
other marital alliance also will be considered biased. In reality, such legal manoeuvrings have
started already. The poignant and mental consequences of these various arrangements on the
growing sexuality of kids and their psyches would be terrible.
Undoubtedly, gay couples can love children just like any other heterosexual couples, but
children want more than love. They need the distinguishing merits and the complementary
personalities of the female and male parent. The accrued understanding of more than 5,000 years
brings the conclusion that the supreme marital and parental arrangement is made up of one male
and one female (Kurdek, 896).
C. Gay Marriage will Authenticate and Encourage the Homosexual Lifestyle
In the family name, homosexual or gay marriages serve to authenticate not only these
form of unifications, but the entire same sex lifestyle in all its transgender and bi-sexual options.
Social laws are forming up principles of human’s life in the society; they play an extremely
significant and at times decisive part in persuading patterns of behaviour and thought. They on
the exterior contour the society life; however they also deeply adjust people’s outlook and
assessment of types of behaviour. It is substantial to claim that lawful appreciation of
homosexual marriage would fundamentally obscure some of the general moral principles,
undervalue conservative marriage, and deteriorate the public morality (Harper and McLanahan,
Gay marriages will make people less faithful towards marriage by encouraging
homosexual lifestyle. One notion that remains very much strong, even amongst individuals who
have manifold sexual partners prior to marriage, is the idea that wedding itself is a sexually elite
affiliation. Amongst the wedded heterosexuals, having sexual connections with anyone other
than the other half is still regarded as the serious breach of conviction and an infringement of the
wedding covenant through an enormous majority of individuals. Hitherto, the same cannot be
mentioned for homosexuals, in particular for homosexual males.
Thus, the conservative argument for gay marriage proposes that validating the human
rights of civil marriage to same sex couples would ‘tame’ the extra marital behaviours amongst
people. Instead of marriage altering the behaviour of same sex couples to equal the comparative
sexual loyalty of different sex couples, it seems expected that the reverse would happen (Stacey,
Judith and Timothy, 160).
It has been stated by studies (Santtila, et al., 104; Stacey, Judith and Biblarz, 160) that
homosexual behaviour amongst people is not genetically driven, rather induced by the
environment. Human sexuality is impressionable, and environmental know-how and persuasions
can and do form its expression. It is worthy to mention in opposition to gay marriage that the
more the surroundings indices or promotes same-sex sexuality, be it in an urban centre or in the
university campus, the more amount of homosexuality will emerge in that setting. Further, it is
also significant to mention that social and cultural rules, and at the same time, legal systems,
persuade human behaviour involving sexual behaviour (Stacey, Judith and Biblarz, 164).
Therefore it is not surprising that as the United States as well as other Western Countries
are becoming very much pro-homosexual in a social, political and legal manner, these countries
have also experienced a rising inclinations in the figure of people getting involved in homosexual
behaviour. This trend will continue to increase if nation will go ahead mere acceptance of
homosexual behaviour (which is suitable) to officially honouring it by making gay marriages
lawful (Frisch and Hviid, 545).
Further, it can be mentioned that the gay community has developed their individual
vibrant culture. By bringing down the dissimilarities in prospects and experiences amongst gay
and different people, this distinctive culture may stop to exist. It will be no wrong to mention that
legalizing the gay marriage phenomenon will expand the homosexual agenda. Moreover, if gay
marriage will be legalized in the United States, children will be also be taught in schools that
homosexuality is with integrity equal to heterosexuality, which indirectly mean teaching that
children do not have any intrinsic civil rights to identify and be developed by both a mother and
a father (Santtila, et al., 103). This disagreement to the substantiation of 'homosexual or gay
marriage' was equal to disagreement to the substantiation of interracial wedding. Children will be
taught that antagonism to both was encouraged by lack of knowledge and hate.
Thus, legalising gay marriage will pass the message that homosexuality is morally
equivalent to heterosexuality, which in turn will expand homosexuality and also increase
homosexual behaviour amongst people. Ultimately, it is apparent that if gay marriage will be
legalised it will encourage and expand homosexual lifestyle in the country, which will be
detrimental for the further development of the society (Frisch and Hviid, 534).
To conclude, it can be mentioned that different people have diverse views and beliefs
about gay marriage, but god has created a man to join hands with a woman, and thus a man is
made for a woman and woman is made for man. The above mentioned discussion in the paper
presents arguments against the legalization of gay marriages and makes it clear that why
legalizing gay marriage is harmful for the nation and is against its development and well being.
Legalizing gay marriage will weaken the marriage institution, which is naturally made for
a man and a woman. Apart from this, homosexual couples are not able to properly and
effectively support the development of children, and thus, gay marriage will not be for children
good. In addition, legalization of gay marriage will promote homosexuality in the society, which
is damaging for the nation.
Cynthia C. Harper and Sara S. McLanahan, “Father Absence and Youth Incarceration,” Journal
of Research on Adolescence 14(3), 2004, p. 388.
Deborah A. Dawson, “Family Structure and Children’s Health and Well-Being: Data from the
1988 National Health Interview Survey on Child Health,” Journal of Marriage and the
Family 53, August 1991: 573-584.
Frisch and Hviid. “Childhood family correlates of heterosexual and homosexual marriages: A
national cohort study of two million Danes.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 35 (2006): 533-
HB Biller. Fathers and families: Paternal factors in child development. Westport, Connecticut:
Auburn House, 1993.
Lawrence Kurdek, “Are Gay and Lesbian Cohabiting Couples Really Different from
Heterosexual Married Couples?” Journal of Marriage and Family 66 (2004): 896.
Lawrence Kurdek, “What Do We Know about Gay and Lesbian Couples? Current Directions in
Psychological Science 14 (2005): 252.
Lerner, Robert and Nagai, Althea. No Basis: What the Studies Don’t Tell Us About Same-Sex
Parenting. Washington DC: Marriage Law, 2001.
Ralph Ranalli, “Lawyer Says State to Drop Case vs. Lexington Father,” The Boston Globe ,
2005, p. B2.
Santtila, Sandnabba, Harlaar, Varjonen, Alanko, and B Pahlen. “Potential for homosexual
response is prevalent and genetic.” Biological Psychology 77 (2008): 102-105.
Sarkadi, Kristiansson, Oberklaid, and S Brember. “Fathers’ involvement and children’s
developmental outcomes: A systematic review of longitudinal studies.” Acta Paediatrica
97 (2008): 153-158.
Stacey, Judith and Biblarz, Timothy J. “(How) does the sexual orientation of parents matter.”
American Sociological Review 66 (2001): 159-183.
Stanley Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia: The ‘conservative case’ for same-sex
marriage collapses,” The Weekly Standard 9, No. 20 (2004): 26-33.