Society just needs more time to accept gay marriages

Glen Drew
Argumentative Essay
June 29, 2007

Gay marriage should be legal. However, most Americans have not had enough time or societal relationships with gays to make it legal. I was just talking to my father the other day about how it's socially acceptable for people to still be prejudiced against gay men and women. I work in the restaurant industry and know some guys in the construction business. They talk pretty openly about not liking those "f---ots". I find it offensive, but then of course I'm accused of being gay and it get's me nowhere. I have now and then been known to say something is gay, but I'm working on it. The reason it surprises me is that these guys are manly white men, and also prejudiced against blacks and treat women like crap. But they don't go around calling them "n---ers" and "c---s". It's socially unacceptable. Somebody would definitely speak up or file a complaint. Women and African American rights have been in play for a couple of hundred years and that's why they're acceptable in society. Gay rights may have started in the 60's, but it really wasn't prominent in our culture until the 80's. That's only twenty five years in our history. As Americans come into more contact socially and culturally with gay people (as they are now), we will eventually let down our guard and say they have the same rights as any heterosexual couple.
Lisa Schiffen does not believe that gay marriages should be legal. She argues that the Judeo-Christian tradition of marriage is clearly not open to gay marriage. She believes that the lifestyles of gay people are not in tradition with the morals of heterosexual married couples (554). Her main argument is that marriage is "a lifelong compact between a man and a woman committed to sexual exclusivity and the creation and nurture of offspring." (554) Schiffen makes the mistake of attacking the homosexual lifestyle and assuming that most gay marriages will not result in monogamy or the raising of children. She also states a very offensive question: Without children, "What will keep gay marriages together when individuals tire of each other?" (554) Her arguments are offensive and tend to assume that gay people have no morals or sexual scruples. She tries to use religion on her side, but the Bible clearly states it is against gay people, and that they are living in sin. How can one believe that a book writtten on morals over 2000 years ago should say how we dictate our society. During the time the bible was written, slavery was rampant, women had no rights, and older men used young boys as sex toys. Gay people today can have morals and be monogamous and raise a family of their own. Schiffen's argument against them is religioulsly biased and makes too many assumptions about the morality of gay men and women.
Thomas B. Stoddard is for legalizing gay marriages. His main argument is that the decision to marry belongs properly to individuals - not the government. He argues that it was illegal for different races to marry before 1967. It was very clear why this law was still in effect. The Supreme Court stated it was "to maintain white supremacy". Stoddard also has a very strong argument for marriage. Marriage creates families and promotes social stability. He also states that marriage is no longer a fundamentally procreative unit. Many people are divorced, have children without marriage, and some couples don't even have children. There is no reason to stop two people regardless of sex to get married in this day and age.
Today, gay marriage is still very controversial to many in our society. The gay lifestyle and the bible's strict adherence will keep many people against gay marriages. However, society has overcome prejudice against women and African Americans and many religions. Given time, gay marriage will no longer be a hot topic, but a societal norm.