Gay marriage is Good for the United States of America

Gay marriage is Good for the United States of America

The adoption of gay marriage is good for the United States of America. The USA, in itself, is a liberal nation, a country that upholds democracy and liberty to individual rights and progressivism (Brown 56). In this context, progressivism relates to the notion of adverse social reforms in support of lesbians, gays, and bisexual and transgender individuals.

The reason why gayism is good for the United States of America is solely for not undermining individual rights and freedom of association. The constitution of the United States of America guarantees that all persons are free to socialize and interact within a proper social construct (Gertsmann 13). As such, gays and lesbians are members of the society to whom the same rights and freedom apply.

The typical American citizen has a liberal mindset. So tolerant to the extent that people accommodate developing behaviors usually abnormal to the contemporary American way of living. Religious aspects aside, gayism is all but a mundane association between persons who feel attracted to each other. When society puts into consideration biological factors, gayism has a more significant bearing for acceptance. It is duly expensive and complex to alter one’s natural hormonal composition.

As more same-sex oriented individuals are born within American society, the more the natural tendency for the nation to embrace gays. This article dwells on the rights and privileges embedded in the constitution for the defense of gay rights within the American society. Gay marriage or gay adoption is good for the United States of America.

As a liberal society, and by agreeing to support gay marriages and adoption rights of the gays, the US upholds its reputation as the world’s number one liberal society. Also, about freedom of association, no person is supposed to be denied intimate interaction with whomever he or she chooses.

Consent is the only consideration that pro-activists and those in opposition should debate. The other point is about America’s position in the world. Most nations emulate America. As a whole, American society is increasingly becoming tolerable to gay marriage (Goldberg et al. 153). Although some select groups of individuals are still cautious about embracing same-sex marriage, quite a number of them are supportive of this notion.

The remaining lots are a few Christians and conservatives to the convention of the old golden ages. They are rigid to change in this modern setup. The mere fact of gay people desiring to adopt kids is good for the society as most children will get opportunities they would instead not get in the typical social structure.

To start with, the liberal mindset, the American society is renowned globally as a nation that embraces the most ideas. People living in the United States have the liberty to practice their faith and engage in standard practices as they deem fit within their social construct (Gertsmann 19). From time immemorial, American leadership has fought for independence and democracy. Now, in this present modern world, negating the principles of American ancestors for freedom of choice of association is detrimental towards progressivism.

Progressivists uphold the idea that those adults of sane mind consent to whatever social affiliation they choose to contend. It is suitable for a society to give people what they request, so long as such approval does cause harm to other people within the community. The conventional ideology is that marriage is between females and males.

However, the new millennial generation seeks to change the narrative. Though much blame should not be on this present generation than the former, the world credits the younglings with the rapid spread of gayism. The more people become self-obsessed, the more the tendency to have same-sex affiliated individuals in society.

For the American people, therefore, it is good for the country to embrace gay marriage and gay adoption. Even the more reason why this is positive to the nation is that gay people can accommodate some orphaned children and shelter them. There are also better living standards in the community, as studies have shown that most same-sex couples do not live below the poverty threshold (Hager 35). Proponents of gay marriage hope and believe that allowing gay marriage and gay adoption rights will alleviate most people to quality standards of living.

Most people agree that marriage has a civil rights aspect (Hager 87). Married people get a lot of government benefits that usually do not accrue unmarried people. Couples get favorable treatment in most situations, such as taxation and insurance covers. There is also the spousal privilege exemption when giving testimony in court (Gertsmann 19). All the above accrue legally married persons. As members of the same community to which the civil rights activists reside, gays exist, and they deserve protection for the said civil rights.

To marry is an act of expressing love and commitment to another person. People get married to make an essential statement of passage. Being able to show and commit to loving someone and to do it without coercion is taken to be definitive of adult human freedom. It is, therefore, not proper to deny same-sex lovers the chance to express their love and commitment to their partners freely. Approving this desire endears America to the world, and more societies that are liberal will emerge. This approval is good for the United States as it ensures continuing dominance over other nations.

Besides, marriage has a religious angle dictating its interpretation. For many people, a wedding is not complete unless the relevant authorities have solemnized it in their religion. The government plays a vital role in all three aspects of marriage. It confers and administers benefits. It seems, at least, to operate as an agent of recognition or the granting of dignity. And it forms alliances with religious bodies. Clergy are always among those entitled to perform legally binding marriages.

Religions may refuse to marry people who are eligible for state marriage, and they may agree to marry people who are ineligible for state marriage. However, religious personnel does much of the official sanctioning of marriage. What they are solemnizing is, however, not only a religious ritual but also a public rite of passage, the entry into a privileged civic status (Hager 88). It is suitable for the United States of America to embrace same-sex marriage and approve adoption rights for the same so that no one is secluded to state privilege for the married.

To deny gay adoption rights because of sexual orientation is not fair. It is not proper that confirmed and convicted criminals have the right to adopt, sodomists, rapists, and serial killer alike, yet same-sex couples do not get the same privilege. America embraces openness and democracy. Hiding behind the guise of conventional marriage between members of the opposite sex, yet people practice unwarranted sexual acts behind the veil of heterosexual marriage. The American society will do good to set free gay individuals in their pursuit of self-love and intimacy with other persons.

What is gay marriage banter about? The debate is not about whether same-sex individuals have an emotional attachment. Few individuals deny that gays and lesbians are not equipped for intimacy and a joint duty of responsibility. The discussion is also not, whether they can have and bring up kids. Whether their own from a past marriage, youngsters made inside their relationship by surrogacy or planned impregnation, same-sex married couples have the same capability to bring up kids as do their conventional counterparts (Goldberg et al. 157). Embracing the ideology of same-sex marriage and adoption will provide an avenue for impoverished children to have homely livelihoods through adoption by gay parents.

The open discussion, instead, is about the expressive parts of marriage. It is here that the contrast between common associations and marriage dwells. The perspective is that same-sex couples see the tradeoff idea of common associations as criticizing and debasing. The emotional component of marriage brings up a few unmistakable issues that all point towards the goodness of the state to concede a marriage permit to communicate open approval of same-sex marriage.

This approval should be across the board. The consent of the government to permit gay marriage and gay adoption rights are suitable for the United States. As a world leader, the USA can utilize this opportunity to influence global change. The government takes the initiative to ensure that the rights of all persons are protected and that there is no single individual who is knowingly and unknowingly violates the rights of the other.

More so, gay marriage curtails the concerns for polygamy and infidelity in marriage. Gay persons are more open to their feelings. As such, mistrust and miscommunication do not generally characterize gay marriages. More blatant communication facilitates open discussion of sexual feelings. Thus, gay couples will most likely mutually consent on proper avenues to salvage their marriage, rather than engaging in extra-marital affairs. This consent is good for American society as it will boost the social structure and confidence in marriage as a social institution.

Conclusion

This article supports the notion that gay marriage or gay adoption is not bad for the United States of America. Reasons being: America is a liberal and democratic country, the second reason is that in as much the society hates to acknowledge, gays are rational human beings in all measures of humanity and individuality. Lastly, the other nations of the world look up to the USA for structural and moral guidance as a first world country. Embracing gay marriage and gay adoption will endear the government to more same-sex individuals who will prefer to live and work in the USA, thus boosting the economy of the country.

Works cited

Brown, Rebecca L. "Accountability, liberty, and the Constitution." Bills of Rights. Routledge, 2017. 49-98.

Gerstmann, Evan. Same-sex Marriage and the Constitution. Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Goldberg, Abbie E., et al. “Lesbian, gay, and heterosexual adoptive parents’ perceptions of inclusivity and receptiveness in early childhood education settings.” Journal of Research in Childhood Education 31.1 (2017): 141-159. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02568543.2016.1244136

Hager, Kelly. Dickens and the rise of divorce: The failed-marriage plot and the novel tradition. Routledge, 2016.