Sample Sociology Paper on Argument Gay Marriage in the United States


Gay marriage is the marriage between two persons or males who are of the similar biological identity or gender. In the current 20th and 21st century a number of same-sex or homosexual unions have come to legalization. However, people have their own contradictory beliefs, views and reasoning’s when it comes to gay marriage. It is notable that god created a man and woman to combine together and elicit vows in the correct manner, but yet in some nations it is legal to get marry with the person of same sex, while some stations are still argumentative on this issue. Same sex marriage should not be legalized because of the chief reason that it alters the conventional meaning of marriage as between a male and a female and will additionally deteriorate an endangered institution.

Legalizing of gay marriage is merely a sneaky slope that may direct to interspecies and polygamous marriages, as well. Gay couples can though have children by adopting them, but homosexual marriage will not be in the interest and benefit of children as for the proper development of a child both father and mother are requisite, and thus gay marriage should not be legalized. Accepting gay marriage to some extent is fair, but legalizing gay marriage will somehow expand and promote homosexuality, which will be detrimental for the society.


  1. Gay Marriage will weaken the Marriage Institution

Sarkadi (2008) has mentioned that same sex marriage decreases the extent of heterosexual marriage in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden and will continue to decrease the ratio in other countries too. Kurdek (2005) has performed a lot of extensive research in the field of homosexual relationships, and also asserted that “Perhaps the most important ‘bottom-line’ question about gay and lesbian couples is whether their relationships last.” (Kurdek, 252). He has concluded that it is no wrong to mention that gay and lesbian couples break up their relationships more regularly as compared to heterosexual couples, in particular heterosexual couples having children.

It is significant to mention that if gay marriage is lawful, then the proportion of homosexual couples who will stay together for a life span will all the time be inferior to the proportion of heterosexual pairs that do so; however the proportion of heterosexual pairs showing lifetime devotion will also turn down, and will damage the society eventually. It is pertinent that marriage between same sex relationships is a self-disagreement, and if the union of gay couples will be legalized, then wedding itself all over the country will get damaged (Sarkadi, 154).

Since, the marriage institution is in so much mess by now; the populace cannot afford to harm it any further. Marriages have for all time been an agreement, between a male and a female, which is by its character well-ordered toward the reproduction and children as well as the harmony and happiness of the couples. However, the promoters of gay marriage recommend something, which is complete dissimilar; a union between two men. In actuality, this refuted the self-apparent physiological, biological, and emotional dissimilarities amongst male and female which discover their complementarity in marriage. It will also refute the fundamental and most important reason of marriage: the continuation of the human race and the development of children for societal or nation development (Deborah, 574).

Further, it is notable that gay couples should be accepted as a subject of social justice, but they should not be authenticated by the state or should not be determined as the type of marriage. It is imperative that regularizing such abnormal behaviours and associations will harm society in the long period of time. The notion that gay marriage is incorrect due to the rationale that gay pairs are one way or another abnormal is not a lot openly stated, but this idea affects other points of view and lies behind a lot of people’s unconstructive outlooks about homosexuality generally (Biller, 32).

For a lot of people, heterosexual associations are the rule, in society as well as in nature Therefore, homosexual connections are anomalous and not natural and due to this reason, they should not be authenticated by the state and should be not be determined as a type of marriage. A basic and simple meaning is that heterosexual marriages are natural because this is what we discover in nature, but homosexual marriages are not found due to which they are abnormal and should not be legalized by society (Biller, 45).

Moreover, marriage is for reproduction and it should not be expanded to the couples of same sex or gay couples as they cannot give birth to children together. In this manner, permitting gay marriage would merely further transfer the reason of marriage from procreation and developing children to only adult fulfilment. It is pertinent to elucidate that it is by children only that sexual connections become significant to society, and valuable to be considered cognizance of by a lawful organization. Homosexual couples can by no means deliver a child with both her biological father and her biological mother (Kurtz, 27). In opposition to the pro gay marriage disagreement that some heterosexual couples cannot produce children or do not want to have children even, but in those cases also there is still the prospective to give birth to children.

Apparently, unproductive different sex couples at times give birth to children, and medical improvements may permit others to reproduce in the future. Still, different sex pairs who do not want to have kids are biologically competent to have them and might alter their minds (Lerner, Robert and Althea, 110).

  1. Gay Marriage is not in the Interest of Children

It has been mentioned by Lerner, Robert and Althea (108) that both mother and father are crucial for the healthy and proper growth of children. It has been found that fathers bring down behavioural issues in boys as well as emotional problems in girls, improve their cognitive development, and diminish their delinquency. On the other hand, a mother helps in enhancing sensitivity, love and care amongst children. It is noteworthy that children advantage from both male and female parent. Current medical researchers have confirmed genetically driven dissimilarities between men and women and those primary differences aids in elucidating why fathers and mothers fetch exclusive features to parenting, which cannot be imitated by the other sex.

In simple words, mothers and fathers are not interchangeable or cannot be substituted. Two men both be good fathers, but neither of them can be a good other to a child. Single sex parenting; be it from a sole parent or homosexual couples, withdraws children of the complete assortment of parenting provided by dual-sex pairs. Only families with both mother-fathers provide children the chance to nurture relationships with a parent of the same, and at the same time of the opposite sex. Associations with both sexes from the beginning in life make it simple and more comfy for a child to connect with the sexes later on in life. On the whole, engaging in a connection with a male and female parent augments the probability that a kid will have flourishing communal and romantic connection during his or her life-span (Kurtz, 29).

Additionally, recent research on children nurtured by homosexuals is scientifically inconsistent as well as tremendously limited, however a few of them in fact points out that those kids are at high risk for a range of unconstructive outcomes. Other research discovers that homosexually reared children will probably experiment sexually, undergone sexual confusion, and employ in bisexual and homosexual behaviour themselves.

However, broad research discloses that children who afterwards employ in non-heterosexual deeds, they will more probably undergo from psychiatric chaos, mistreatment, alcohol and drugs, try suicide, go through domestic violence and sexual stabbing, and are at higher threat for chronic sicknesses, as well, like AIDS, and short lives. It is in interest of the child to be developed under the pesusuaion of his natural mother or father. This rule has also been established by the number of apparent problems confronted by a lot of children who are orphans or are also developed by a sole parent, any relative, or by a foster parent (Ranalli, B2).

The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model. It has also been found in studies that children brought up by homosexuals will probably engage in homosexuality themselves as a lot of worldwide research makes it clear that homosexual behaviour is mainly induced by the environmental. Particularly, family and/or social determinants, and unautocratic environments which insist homosexual behaviour, play fundamental environmental roles in developing homosexual behaviour (Ranalli, B2).

It is likely that if the society allows gay marriage or same sex marriage, then it has to permit other forms of non-traditional weddings too. The simple legal logic is that if barring gay marriage is prejudiced, then prohibiting polyamorous marriage, polygamous marriage, and any other marital alliance also will be considered biased. In reality, such legal manoeuvrings have started already. The poignant and mental consequences of these various arrangements on the growing sexuality of kids and their psyches would be terrible.

Undoubtedly, gay couples can love children just like any other heterosexual couples, but children want more than love. They need the distinguishing merits and the complementary personalities of the female and male parent. The accrued understanding of more than 5,000 years brings the conclusion that the supreme marital and parental arrangement is made up of one male and one female (Kurdek, 896).

  1. Gay Marriage will Authenticate and Encourage the Homosexual Lifestyle

In the family name, homosexual or gay marriages serve to authenticate not only these form of unifications, but the entire same sex lifestyle in all its transgender and bi-sexual options. Social laws are forming up principles of human’s life in the society; they play an extremely significant and at times decisive part in persuading patterns of behaviour and thought. They on the exterior contour the society life; however they also deeply adjust people’s outlook and assessment of types of behaviour. It is substantial to claim that lawful appreciation of homosexual marriage would fundamentally obscure some of the general moral principles, undervalue conservative marriage, and deteriorate the public morality (Harper and McLanahan, 388).

Gay marriages will make people less faithful towards marriage by encouraging homosexual lifestyle. One notion that remains very much strong, even amongst individuals who have manifold sexual partners prior to marriage, is the idea that wedding itself is a sexually elite affiliation. Amongst the wedded heterosexuals, having sexual connections with anyone other than the other half is still regarded as the serious breach of conviction and an infringement of the wedding covenant through an enormous majority of individuals. Hitherto, the same cannot be mentioned for homosexuals, in particular for homosexual males.

Thus, the conservative argument for gay marriage proposes that validating the human rights of civil marriage to same sex couples would ‘tame’ the extra marital behaviours amongst people. Instead of marriage altering the behaviour of same sex couples to equal the comparative sexual loyalty of different sex couples, it seems expected that the reverse would happen (Stacey, Judith and Timothy, 160).

It has been stated by studies (Santtila,  et al., 104; Stacey, Judith and Biblarz, 160) that homosexual behaviour amongst people is not genetically driven, rather induced by the environment. Human sexuality is impressionable, and environmental know-how and persuasions can and do form its expression. It is worthy to mention in opposition to gay marriage that the more the surroundings indices or promotes same-sex sexuality, be it in an urban centre or in the university campus, the more amount of homosexuality will emerge in that setting. Further, it is also significant to mention that social and cultural rules, and at the same time, legal systems, persuade human behaviour involving sexual behaviour (Stacey, Judith and Biblarz, 164).

Therefore it is not surprising that as the United States as well as other Western Countries are becoming very much pro-homosexual in a social, political and legal manner, these countries have also experienced a rising inclinations in the figure of people getting involved in homosexual behaviour. This trend will continue to increase if nation will go ahead mere acceptance of homosexual behaviour (which is suitable) to officially honouring it by making gay marriages lawful (Frisch and Hviid, 545).

Further, it can be mentioned that the gay community has developed their individual vibrant culture. By bringing down the dissimilarities in prospects and experiences amongst gay and different people, this distinctive culture may stop to exist. It will be no wrong to mention that legalizing the gay marriage phenomenon will expand the homosexual agenda. Moreover, if gay marriage will be legalized in the United States, children will be also be taught in schools that homosexuality is with integrity equal to heterosexuality, which indirectly mean teaching that children do not have any intrinsic civil rights to identify and be developed by both a mother and a father (Santtila,  et al., 103). This disagreement to the substantiation of ‘homosexual or gay marriage’ was equal to disagreement to the substantiation of interracial wedding. Children will be taught that antagonism to both was encouraged by lack of knowledge and hate.

Thus, legalising gay marriage will pass the message that homosexuality is morally equivalent to heterosexuality, which in turn will expand homosexuality and also increase homosexual behaviour amongst people. Ultimately, it is apparent that if gay marriage will be legalised it will encourage and expand homosexual lifestyle in the country, which will be detrimental for the further development of the society (Frisch and Hviid, 534).


To conclude, it can be mentioned that different people have diverse views and beliefs about gay marriage, but god has created a man to join hands with a woman, and thus a man is made for a woman and woman is made for man. The above mentioned discussion in the paper presents arguments against the legalization of gay marriages and makes it clear that why legalizing gay marriage is harmful for the nation and is against its development and well being.

Legalizing gay marriage will weaken the marriage institution, which is naturally made for a man and a woman. Apart from this, homosexual couples are not able to properly and effectively support the development of children, and thus, gay marriage will not be for children good. In addition, legalization of gay marriage will promote homosexuality in the society, which is damaging for the nation.



Works Cited

Cynthia C. Harper and Sara S. McLanahan, “Father Absence and Youth Incarceration,” Journal of Research on Adolescence 14(3), 2004, p. 388.

Deborah A. Dawson, “Family Structure and Children’s Health and Well-Being: Data from the 1988 National Health Interview Survey on Child Health,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53, August 1991: 573-584.

Frisch and Hviid. “Childhood family correlates of heterosexual and homosexual marriages: A national cohort study of two million Danes.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 35 (2006): 533-547.

HB Biller. Fathers and families: Paternal factors in child development. Westport, Connecticut: Auburn House, 1993.

Lawrence Kurdek, “Are Gay and Lesbian Cohabiting Couples Really Different from Heterosexual Married Couples?” Journal of Marriage and Family 66 (2004): 896.

Lawrence Kurdek, “What Do We Know about Gay and Lesbian Couples? Current Directions in Psychological Science 14 (2005): 252.

Lerner, Robert and Nagai, Althea. No Basis: What the Studies Don’t Tell Us About Same-Sex Parenting. Washington DC: Marriage Law, 2001.

Ralph Ranalli, “Lawyer Says State to Drop Case vs. Lexington Father,” The Boston Globe , 2005, p. B2.

Santtila, Sandnabba, Harlaar, Varjonen, Alanko, and B Pahlen. “Potential for homosexual response is prevalent and genetic.” Biological Psychology 77 (2008): 102-105.

Sarkadi, Kristiansson, Oberklaid, and S Brember. “Fathers’ involvement and children’s developmental outcomes: A systematic review of longitudinal studies.” Acta Paediatrica 97 (2008): 153-158.

Stacey, Judith and Biblarz, Timothy J. “(How) does the sexual orientation of parents matter.” American Sociological Review 66 (2001): 159-183.

Stanley Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia: The ‘conservative case’ for same-sex marriage collapses,” The Weekly Standard 9, No. 20 (2004): 26-33.