Impact of Gay On The Society

IMPACT OF GAY ON THE SOCIETY
Marriage has been universally acknowledged throughout history as a legal

contract between a man and a woman in which there is emotional and sexual
fidelity, along with childrearing. But homosexual marriage would change this.
Since marriage is also a moral issue, redefining marriage is redefining morals.
Furthermore, marriage is an extremely wide-spread practice within any
society and has many legal and moral issues attached to it. So, when marriage
is redefined, the society is dramatically affected. Legalizing gay marriage
means changing the laws of the land. The ramifications are vast and we are
seeing the effects of homosexual legal "rights" affecting housing, education, the
work place, medicine, the armed forces, adoption, religion, etc. Are all the
changes good? That is hotly debated. But we have to ask, is it morally right to
force all of society to adopt the morals of a minority? Gay Marriage means a
redefinition of sexual morality, and with it other sexually related practices will
be affected and this can be harmful. If gay marriage is allowed, the nation will
soon begin to experience an increased degradation of the nuclear family
resulting in fewer kids being raised by both a mother and a father. An even
more substantive danger lies in the consequences of gay marriage on the next
generation. Redefining marriage redefines family. Changing the concept of
family will change both the definition and the pattern of parenting.
Here is a list of ways in which gay marriage can bring harm.
Fewer people would marry

Giving the option of same-sex "marriage" would tell society that marriage in
general is "optional," not normative, and fewer people would marry. Fewer
people would remain monogamous and sexually faithful.
Birth rates would fall.

Same-sex "marriage" would eliminate the incentive for procreation that is
implicit in defining marriage as a male-female union. There is a positive
correlation between same-sex "marriage" and low birth and fertility rates. Gay
Marriage reduces the number of children born in society and we need a stable
population base to operate.
Gay Marriage affects people spiritually.
Don't assume that people's spiritual beliefs are irrelevant. People consider
spiritual issues to be extremely important, and the stress imposed on religious
people by forcing them to "accept" and/or support homosexual practice
and/or intimidate them into silence harms a person's spiritual and emotional
health.
Freedom of conscience and religious liberty would be threatened.

Churches and non-profit organizations could be stripped of their tax
exemptions and religious psychologists, social workers, and marriage
counselors could be denied licensing if they "discriminate" against
homosexuals. Individual believers who disapprove of homosexual
relationships may face a choice at work between forfeiting their freedom of
speech and being fired. It forces government to get involved in changing laws
which automatically affect everyone in society.
The health risks are enormous to themselves and others.

The fact is that homosexuals do not live as long as heterosexuals due to the
health risks associated with the lifestyle, and billions of dollars are spent
annually in health care for them. But the HIV/AIDS epidemic is not only in the
homosexual community. It has crossed over to the heterosexual community.
But the fact is that it is highly prevalent among the gay and lesbian community
due to their great number of sex partners. The collateral damage to the rest of
society, as far as health risks, cannot be denied. Also, the increases in
pedophilia, pornography, child pornography, prostitution, and sex trafficking
are not due to an increase in conservative sexual morals, but a reduction of
conservative sexual morals. People who practice homosexuality experience
higher rates of many diseases and have higher rates of Alcohol abuse, Drug
abuse, Nicotine dependence, Depression, Suicide, Domestic violence-all things
that impact society negatively. Homosexual behavior is a major force that tears
down society and harms children.
Taxpayers, consumers, and businesses would be forced to subsidize

homosexual relationships. If same-sex marriage were legalized, all employers,
public and private, large or small, would be required to offer spousal benefits
to homosexual couples. You, as a taxpayer, consumer, or small business owner,
would be forced to bear the expense of subsidizing homosexual relationships-
including their higher health care costs.
It can bring huge financial and emotional stress.
Homosexuals can sue people who are exercising their religious beliefs. For
example, heterosexual married couples with children who do not want to rent
a room in their own family household to homosexuals could be sued for
discrimination based on "sexual orientation." This can incur significant
financial and emotional stress upon the family, not to mention the "prior
restraint" effect of the fear of being sued which results in a family not renting
out a room.
Legalizing gay marriage means forcing minority opinion on the majority of

population. This can also be said in the reverse. Either way, there is a problem.
Normally, morals should not be forced on anyone, though there are exceptions.
We force morals on others by preventing them from stealing, raping,
murdering, etc. So, it is not automatically wrong to force morals on someone.
But the issue then becomes what is morally right and wrong in the first place,
and altering morals in a society definitely causes stress. The percentage of
homosexuals in society is less than 5%, yet it is being forced upon the other
95% of society in movies, TV, literature, and political periods.
Among homosexual men, sex with multiple partners is tolerated and often
expected. As a result, Fewer people would remain married for a lifetime. Even
a homosexual psychologist has acknowledged that "gay and lesbian couples
dissolve their relationships more frequently than heterosexual couples."As the
transience of homosexual relationships is incorporated in society's image of
"marriage," we can expect that fewer heterosexuals would maintain a lifelong
commitment.
Fewer children would be raised by a married mother and father. More

children would grow up fatherless. Social science has clearly proven clearly
that children do best when raised by their own married biological mother and
father.
Most children who live with only one biological parent will live with their
mothers, and lesbian couples are more likely to be raising children than
homosexual male couples. Therefore, with same-sex "marriage," more children
would suffer the specific negative consequences of fatherlessness, which
include higher rates of youth incarceration among males and adolescent
pregnancy among females.
Demands for legalization of polygamy would grow.
If a person's choice of spouse cannot be limited based on the sex of one's
partner, it is hard to see how it could be limited based on the number of
spouses either.
Homosexual behavior not only seriously harms homosexuals individually, it
harms society also.
CONCLUSION
Same-sex marriage and marriage alternatives will both produce more change
in family law and continue to reflect underlying shifts in gender norms and
social practices across the population. These house-hold forms remain very
much a set of works in progress, “incomplete institutions” in both law and
culture. That very incompleteness, however, also heightens the possibility that
the regulation of same-sex relationships will influence the law governing all
family structures in ways that we cannot yet foresee. The institution of
marriage is unique. It is the one institution that binds women and men
together to form a family, and this serves broad societal purposes. A marriage
requires a husband and a wife, because these unions are necessary to make
new life and connect children to their mother and father. Advocates of making
same-sex marriage a legally recognized right claim that this will have no
impact on traditional marriage which it can peacefully coexist alongside
traditional marriage. On the contrary, it will have profound impacts. It will
create a conflict for people of faith (and nonreligious people as well) who
fervently believe in traditional man-woman. Also, homosexual conduct is
harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never
be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with
negative physical and psychological health effects. While the origins of same-
sex attractions may be complex, there is no convincing evidence that a
homosexual identity is ever something genetic or inborn. We oppose the
vigorous efforts of homosexual activists to demand that homosexuality be
accepted as equivalent to heterosexuality in law, in the media, and in schools.
Attempts to join two men or two women in "marriage" constitute a radical
redefinition and falsification of the institution. Sympathy must be extended to
those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, and every effort
should be made to assist such persons to overcome those attractions, as many
already have.
References Books
Vanita, Ruth; Kidwai, Saleem (2001). Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History (1st ed.).
New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-312-29324-0.
Daniélou, Alain (1994). The Complete Kama Sutra (Ebook Download). Park Street Press. ISBN 0-89281-492-6.
Narrain, Arvind; Gautam Bhan (2006). Because I Have a Voice: Queer Politics in India. New Delhi: Yoda
Press. ISBN 81-902272-2-X.
Paola Bacchetta. “Queer Formations in (Hindu) Nationalism.” In Sexuality Studies, edited by Sanjay Srivasta,
121-140. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Merchant, Hoshang (1999). Yaraana: Gay Writing from India. New Delhi: Penguin. ISBN 0-14-0278397. (First
edition)
Thadani, Giti (1996). Sakhiyani: Lesbian Desire in Ancient and Modern India. London: Cassell. ISBN 0-304-
33451-0.
Vanita, Ruth (2005). Love's Rite: Same-Sex Marriage in India and the West. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan. ISBN 1-4039-7038-6.
Joseph, Sherry (2005). Social Work Practice and Men Who Have Sex With Men. Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publications. ISBN 0-7619-3352-2.
Nanda, Serena (1998). Neither Man Nor Woman: The Hijras of India. USA: Wadsworth Publishing. ISBN 0-534-
50903-7. (Second edition)
Shahani, Parmesh (2008). GayBombay: Globalization Love and Belonging in Contemporary India. USA, India:
SAGE.

Impact of Gay On The Society

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of Gay On The Society

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of Gay On The Society

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IMPACT OF GAY ON THE SOCIETY

Marriage has been universally acknowledged throughout history as a legal

Here is a list of ways in which gay marriage can bring harm.

Fewer people would marry

Birth rates would fall.

Freedom of conscience and religious liberty would be threatened.

The health risks are enormous to themselves and others.

Taxpayers, consumers, and businesses would be forced to subsidize

Legalizing gay marriage means forcing minority opinion on the majority of

Fewer children would be raised by a married mother and father. More

You might also like