TED Conversations

Obey No1kinobe


This conversation is closed.

Will same sex marriage damage the family?

Proponents of same sex marriage suggest it is an issue of equality - human rights - an end to discrimination.

Opponents object firstly on religious grounds, that it is unnatural. That it breaks tradition. Racism, sexism are often supported by religious views and tradition. Weak arguments in this case as well.

The argument that perhaps resonates most is that same sex marriage will damage the family unit, damage, children, damage society.

I propose gay marriage has no significant impact on heterosexual families. So this argument also fails.

Agree or disagree?


Closing Statement from Obey No1kinobe

Thanks All. I guess society hasn't collapsed with the introduction of civil unions or gay marriage in some states and countries. In fact there wasn't too much debate about the consequences.
Most objections related to changing the traditional definition of marriage. My understanding is some of these related to marriage having a spiritual or religious dimension. Some just think homosexuality is a defect, unnatural or worse. I expect these views are not limited to religious people.

I agree it is a change to the definition. Those for and against need a stronger argument than their personal or religious views. I respect that marriage is an important institution and should not be changed lightly. However, I still find the argument in terms of civil rights and ending discrimination based on sexual orientation compelling. Considering the arguments against I note none really presented a rationale that this change would be harmful in some tangible way.

I think we have a right to be free from the religious views of others and pursue happiness that does not harm others. I think we should end unjustified discrimination.

There was sense in some of the comments that SSM is going against some natural laws, will impact families or even threaten the continuation of the human race. I suggest that what same sex couple does not and will not impact heterosexual couples, and the the human race is in no danger of dropping population growth.

My own opinion is that some just oppose the normalisation and acceptance of homosexuality. Some religious folk expressed a respect for everyone regardless of sexual orientation. This gives me some hope.

This may not be the most important issue in the world right now, unless it directly affects you personally or a loved one. It just seems something relatively easy that will improve the situation for many ordinary people who love someone but are denied the right to marry.

Thanks all.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Mar 6 2012: It may not damage the "family", but I believe it will damage the authenticity of "growing up" for a child. Your question does not suggest children, but their place in a gay marriage is becoming topical now.

    The existence of a gay "married" couple should not damage the family per se, but if this marriage includes children the debate is a new one all over again.

    Humans (and most else) has two genders. Each has different construction and processes towards achievement of goals. Unless the two same sex "parents" can display, teach and promote both genders in a more or less equal proportion to the children, then the children are going to be robbed of "growing up" with an equal chance.

    Fathers teach boys how to be men and how men should treat women. Mothers teach girls how to be ladies and how women should treat men. These are learned by example. They are behavioural lessons, not factual matrices. If both "parents" are the same sex, (no matter how effeminate or butch), I don't believe the children will learn these lessons.

    Many heterosexual couples fail at providing good examples here and it has led to an incredible breakdown in the family unit and the state of our society. The desirable trend would be to reverse this trend rather than to enhance it.
    50% of marriages fail, and that is a societal issue, so society needs to find a solution. It may be as simple as making advertising illegal, who knows without trial and debate, but I think most would concur that having children in a same sex marriage is not going to enhance the family unit.

    This is not to say that the children could not be loved, well provided for, educated and given great opportunities. It is merely removing an important part of their upbringing that moulds them to be future parents and members of a dual gender race.

    The logical conclusion may help illustrate. If all marriages were same sex, procreation is lost and genetic diversity becomes reliant on choices made in the laboratory. This is not nature.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.