Words: 1096
“We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it! “. A recognized anthem outspoken at marches, demonstrations, parades, and advertising within most homosexual communities. “Queer” is just one, amongst many omens used to describe a homosexual person or group. The remote past of homosexual people is a vast and captivating road that has brought us to where we are today concerning the ethics: the system of determining right from wrong, of homosexual people including rights and freedoms concerning them.
Ever since the beginning of Greek homosexuality until today within our cities in the esters world, the rights of homosexuals have been questioned and analyzed every year in a most controversial and confound way that have resulted in the interest of governments policies colliding with the religions Of the world and a background work of demonstrations and outburst of the homosexual community. One of the dominant areas of debate is the palaver of marriage between two persons of the same gender.
In my educated opinion, assume that the term “marriage” concerns itself with the religious ventures of sealing a relationship legitimately, therefore in this case of topic, I live that homosexual people should be given the option of a legal union and all the rights and freedoms as all heterosexual married people, however, people of the same-sex should not be given the option to marry within a holy environment that opposes and disbelief in homosexuality, such as churches, mosques, and temples, etc…. Motive utilitarianism attempts to deal realistically with how human beings function psychologically.
It explains that we are passionate, emotional beings that do much better with positive goals rather than negative prohibitions. This action cannot be taken away from homosexual people as they too are included in these beliefs. A same-sex couple that have a desire to get married and bond a union explains that psychologically, they would like to achieve positive results from affirmative goals in their life; getting married. Then why should they be granted permission to marry as oppose to practicing their human rights and for their own inner happiness and marry whomever they choose?
There has always been a primary impugning feeling when the discussion of homosexuality and same-sex marriage are brought up within a religious domain. In my personal opinion, will state that the topic is a heated and controversial deliberation that cannot easily find a solution which would gratify the populace as a whole. The Christian opinions of what is right and what is wrong when affiliated with same-sex marriage, is composed of a series of bold statements and the questioning of morality and homosexuality.
Religion and marriage are intertwined together an perhaps the most serious manners of actions. One looking to get married through a church or temple or within most holy habitats must be getting married to the opposite sex. The charity of religions in the world do not allow same-sex marriage within their holy books and scripts that shape their intellect/dogma and unions. Therefore believe this annex should not be tended to couples of the same sex looking to get married within a holy ceremony. The formalities are set by the religions and they should be respected.
British Philosophers, John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Beneath established the fundamental principles of hedonism through the ethical theory of utilitarianism. The hedonistic idea argues that all actions can be measured on the basis of how much pleasure and how little pain they produce: a simple Asia belief system of pleasure over pain. This idea reflects the belief that all humans need to have happiness, and pleasure can be a mere word to define happiness. Same-sex couples should be given the right to formally articulate a union of marriage because of the “human nature philosophy” of pleasure over pain.
If this right is non-existent to homosexual couples, then pain in enforced upon them and pleasure is no longer of any importance. This could also lead to the discussion Of human equality and human rights. By considering the hedonistic ideas, have formulated a thesis that states the CT of a same-sex couple getting married under a religious system would create more pain, as same-sex couples are outnumbered by the population of people who are against same-sex marriage within a religion per SE. Therefore, the majority of the population would be in “pain”.
At what cost would one take action for such pleasures? However sanctified these protocols might be there must still be an impartial resolution that would benefit homosexual couples as well. Couples of the same sex should be given all the rights and freedoms to marry within a union conducted by a countries government. Same-sex couples who regulate this conjunction should not be kept from any of the services that heterosexual couples receive. In fact, they should be given all the same services and respect by the government.
I believe this to be the most efficient solution to a world-wide controversial conflict such as same-sex marriage. Homosexual couples must come to terms with the respect that must be given to holy residences, as they do not allow same-sex marriage within their union; a union formed hundreds of years ago and that is now revealed through text. Same-sex marriage within a church, for example, would not be granted because of the bold and certain beliefs that the religious union and its members have.
In consummation, ultimately this fair solution would benefit everyone. The same-sex couples would be able to lead normal lives like any other heterosexual couples with the same respect and benefits that are bestowed upon them by the government and religious groups will have peace of mind as their ancient beliefs are left undisturbed. Since the days of Socrates where he was labeled as “boy crazy” or to modern days where a certain part of most major cities are categorized as the gay community with interesting names (I. E.
Church Street [Toronto], The Village [Montreal], or Agway [Vancouver]) we are surrounded by a culture that has become a phenomenon and a subject that can easily argue with almost all ethical theories of the most major or modern philosophers who ever spoke on homosexuality or same-sex marriage. The most possible of solutions must be recognized by the governments, and put to practice as soon as humanly possible for there to be peace and justice for not just heterosexual or homosexual people, but human race; all people.