Homosexual Indifference :: Free Essays Online

Homosexual Indifference The times seem to be changing in acceptance of homosexual relationships for the better, but many laws as well as society still prohibit gay marriage and adoption. There are two sources which I will use to show different view points on gay marriage and adoption. The first is an article written by Andrew Sullivan, titled â€Å"Let Gays Marry.† This is written as an informal piece to argue that gay people should be allowed to marry one another. The next is also on gay marriage, but in this article, â€Å"Leave Marriage Alone,† author William Bennett writes that it is wrong for gays to marry. These two authors show separate feelings on the issue of gay marriage, while attempting to persuade the readers to agree with them. Each of these articles have valuable arguments, but will they be enough to change people’s views, to benefit their beliefs? Beginning with the topic on gay marriage and the controversial battle between authors, Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett, Sullivan is the gay supporter. In Sullivan’s piece, â€Å"Let Gays Marry,† he opens with a statement by the Supreme Court, â€Å"A state cannot deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws.† He feels that this simple sentence has so much meaning, saying that whatever type of person, male or female, black or white, everyone deserves the same legal protection and equal rights. Therefore, gay marriage should not be excluded from the legal system. He tells that some churches practice different beliefs and may oppose gay marriage but religion has nothing to do with the state appeals. Sullivan explains how the definition of marriage has changed in the past and that it can be done again. Sullivan ends his piece by saying that changing the law would not affect straight couples, so why are they against gay marriage? He believes t he change would allow gay couples to experience what straight couples already have. On the other hand, William Bennett, author of â€Å"Leave Marriage Alone,† feels that the right for gays to marry should not come into effect. He begins by asking if gay marriage will benefit the institution. He fears that if this law was passed the true meaning of marriage would be altered and destroyed.