A Case Against Same-sex Marriage

Whether gay marriage is different from heterosexual marriage. In the official definition, marriage is "an eternal association of loyalty between men and women, a partnership between husband and wife." Because of this definition, "same-sex marriage" is not even a true marriage. In fact, it is denying the main purpose of marriage, that is to lay child. In same-sex marriage, two men or two women can not copy without a third party. Because men need women, women need men.

Finnis (1996), Lee (1997) and George (1997) oppose gay marriage citing natural law. However, unlike traditional natural law theory versions, those versions are not dependent on any definite theological or metaphysical claim. Instead, quote the independent principle of practical reasoning and clarify the cause of fundamental behavior. These reasons are basic items that can be achieved by action, for Finnis, Lee and George include "marriage, men and women" (Finnis 1996: 4). Homosexuality, masturbation, and all pre - marital sex are strictly targeted for "personal satisfaction" and can not be part of "common interest". These acts "hurt the personality of voluntarily selecting them" (Lee and George, 1997: 135). And when acting, the individual becomes a slave of his passion, allowing his reason to be covered by his own desire for sensitivity. . pleasant

Let's think about the same-sex marriage lawsuit submitted to the US Supreme Court in 2015. There is no major law firm - I got the first answer in the Supreme Court case - they are not going to represent the party against gay marriage. Mr. John J. Bursch, a lawyer who admitted this case, worked well in the practice of the Supreme Court but was irrelevant to his company's "refusing the representative." Excellent talent of the best law school is expected to rearrange the center of equality of armed as a functional and conflicting legal system. In addition, they will recognize the necessary distinction between lawyers' personal beliefs and the allegations she will submit to the court for the client.

Cliff: You can see how opponents of same-sex marriage use history to combat the increase of legitimacy of same-sex marriage. In March 2013, the same sex marriage appeared in an oral debate about the United States vs Windsor case that he believed "was updated more than a mobile phone" ... for people who claim that it is important that one gay marriage is important There is evidence that it is entirely new, that this is not a whole new thing. This is a tradition of ethnic minorities, an ancient tradition, and history is not an excuse for depriving LGBT people of equal rights.