The homosexuality issues and homosexual marriage

Homosexual marriage is an issue very problematic because affects to many institutions and tradi­tional beliefs. Mainly it affects to religion, but also in some aspects some people have treated ho­mosexuality as an illness and until the 70s was considered by psychiatrists as it, a illness that could be cured. But from the 70s the WHO(World Health Organization) left to consider homosexuality like an illness. If not, that in medical terms is something that can’t be treated, and that is normal, natural. Then from this point the people have changed their vision on homosexuality. And have star­ted to be more accepted, in the occidental world. And then, from that point the homosexuals have been fighting to have the same rights than the heterosexual couples, this means to be able to marry.

Marriage is the union of a two people that love themselves. It is the official act where the people in­volved in the marriage declare their love in eyes of god, government or whatever authority or not.

Although marriage is an institution older than the actual religions, and older. Religions like Christi­an declare that marriage is a religious act. But, in the Roman Civil law, more than 2000 years ago, already was contemplated marriage. Then is observable than marriage is not only religious, mar­riage can be civil and religious.

And it is possible to see more deeply when we see the local legislation of some countries, for example, Spain where marriage must be registered in the civil register to validate it. If it is not done, the marriage is just wet paper, there is no validity, and the people is not legally married, and in con­sequence they can’t declare that they are married. Then, when someone marries in a church doing a religious marriage. The church is responsible to register this marriage to the civil institutions.

Marriage is necessary, for contract binding. The marriage is the way that the government recognize a relation and to grant the rights associated to this institution. Married couples have some special re­cognizances from the government like adoption, inheritance when some part of the marriage dies. For all these rights, also there are special rights with the taxes, can be considered necessary the mar­riage. Although, today there are other kind of unions in some countries, but with different rights, and can be interesting for people that link marriage to some outdated tradition.

Many marriage end in divorce because it didn’t work. And in the divorce there are some rights and obligations acquired, like depending of the kind of marriage. So, the marriage is not something eternal until the death. Married couples many times have problems of convenience or others, and that cause that marriage ends in failure and divorce. So there is nothing sacred or eternal in the mar­riage, is not more than a contract.

If marriage is not only religious, why religious institutions oppose to homosexual marriage? If mar­riage can be civil and in reality it doesn’t affect how is conducted the religious marriage. If in a reli­gion the doctrine say that only want to marry two people of different sex, they can do that. Even if homosexual marriage is approved, that will be civil. There is no logic behind in that argument. Be­cause there is no mandate to change their traditions, they are free to discriminate homosexual couples and not leave them to celebrate the homosexual religious marriage in their ceremonies.

Other reason in the opposition from religious institutions to homosexual marriage is that from their point of view this puts in danger the traditional marriage and also that the religious institutions will be forced to marry homosexuals and change their doctrines, that how was mentioned in the last paragraph, that was impossible.

The opposition to homosexual marriage also says that it is the end to the traditional family, is the decadency of the family, the destruction of it. When religious institutions talk about traditional family is the family formed by a husband and a wife and with one or a few children. And from their point of view with the approval of the homosexual marriage this will end the family. But how I mentioned before in the divorce point, many couples get divorced, it means that the traditional family becomes destroyed. At least from their point of view, and there is no opposition. More, be­cause there are churches that permit the divorce, like most of the protestants.

But both positions are completely false. The first argument is easily refutable because the traditional marriage will be as ever. There won’t be changes. And about that the religious institutions will be forced to marry homosexuals doesn’t have any logic in it. Because the marriage will be done by the civil institutions and this doesn’t affect in nothing to the religious marriage. Civil marriage and reli­gious marriage are separate institutions. They don’t work together. So there is no reason to fear that the government force the religious institutions to practice homosexual marriage.

Also other argument that uses the people that oppose to the homosexual marriage is that if is pos­sible the homosexual marriage, why not marry between human and animals, or the polygamy. It is observable that in the first case is not comparable because animals can’t consent. While the homo­sexual marriage is between two adults that consent to that relation.

The homosexual marriage has been approved in many countries: the firsts in approve that were Canada, Sweden and Spain. This last year was approved the homosexual marriage in Argentina, be­coming the first country of South America to approve this kind of marriage.

Although these approvals, mainly in Spain and Argentina had a lot of opposition from the conser­vative parties and the Catholic Church. As I’ve introduced before their main argument was that the traditional marriage was put in danger, that it would destroy the family, and had to be protected the family. Their argument was how unnatural was the homosexuality and it goes against the Christian values. But lately in Spain homosexual marriage has been accepted by most part of the population, and only some radical sectors refuse to accept it, mainly the Catholic bishops.

If the homosexuals can marry, it means that they can have exactly the same rights than the rest of people. With the marriage homosexuals have full rights like adoption, inheritance in case of death of the spouse.

Homosexual to have full granted rights need to be able to adopt children. Like any other kind of couple or even single adults can. The homosexuals also need this right, and this right has been intro­duced to many countries, like Spain, but in other countries of Europe, homosexuals can’t adopt. And adoption is other big problem for that people that refuse the idea that homosexuals are equal. They say that a homosexual couple can’t educate so well like an heterosexual family. And that children can become homosexual. Nothing so far from reality, because if this theory was right, the homo­sexuals wouldn’t exist, because until now the couples were heterosexual. The children, what they need basically are parents that they love them, and it is what homosexual couples can give as well as any heterosexual couple.

Other problems of acceptance that homosexuals find is that many times they can’t donate blood, be­cause in many places they are considered a dangerous group. This fallacy prejudges them and be­fore a right analysis consider that they have dangerous relations, like being promiscuous. But you can be promiscuous being heterosexual or homosexual. This fact doesn’t affect. It is a clear discrimination to homosexuals, so the battle for equal rights never end. Always there will be some place, some activity where the homosexuals will suffer some kind of discrimination. Hundreds years of discrimination and being considered as inferior, sick people or worse things are very difficult to change with a few decades.