First, what is MARRIAGE?
Marriage is a socially or ritually recognized union or legal contract between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, between them and their children. (From that statement, the word children are the most important thing in marriage, WHY? Because we all know having same sex marriage CANNOT produce a child) What is SAME SEX MARRIAGE?
Decrease of population growth caused by SAME SEX MARRIAGE
Extending the benefits and status of “marriage” to couples who are intrinsically incapable of natural procreation (two men or two women) would dramatically change the social meaning of the institution. It would become impossible to argue that “marriage” is about encouraging the formation of life-long, potentially procreative (opposite-sex) relationships. The likely long-term result would be that fewer such relationships would be formed, fewer such couples would choose to procreate, and fewer babies would be born. Long term consequences are not worth the risk.
The first and most obvious consequence to allowing gay marriage would be the drastic decrease in population. What if everyone decided that they were a homosexual? It may sound a little extreme, but if that happen the human race as we know it would cease to exist. Facts of decreasing population growth caused by same sex marriage: The effect on the population would be that there would be no children born of that union. Since it takes a male and a female to produce offspring, and since, by definition, a same-sex marriage would contain 2 persons of the same sex, they would contribute 0% to the population growth.
Disadvantage of legalizing same sex marriage:
1. The negative side of same-sex marriage is that some see it as godless. 2. It is not acceptable by some religious orders.
3. Some societies ostracise those involved.
4. They can’t have kids w/o outside help.
5. Many countries do not recognise it and any rights associated with ‘normal’ marriage are not given. 6.
TOP 10 HARM EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING SAME SEX MARRIAGE:
1. Taxpayers, consumers, and businesses would be forced to subsidize homosexual relationships. If same-sex marriage were legalized, all employers, public and private, large or small, would be required to offer spousal benefits to homosexual couples. You, as a taxpayer, consumer, or small business owner, would be forced to bear the expense of subsidizing homosexual relationships-including their higher health care costs. 2. Schools would teach that homosexual relationships are identical to heterosexual ones. A lesbian who teaches 8th grade sex education in Massachusetts told NPR that she teaches her children how lesbians use “a sex toy” to have intercourse.
If anyone objects, she says, “Give me a break. It’s legal now.” One father was jailed after protesting because his son-a kindergarten student-was given a book about same-sex couples. 3. Freedom of conscience and religious liberty would be threatened. Churches and non-profit organizations could be stripped of their tax exemptions and religious psychologists, social workers, and marriage counselors could be denied licensing if they “discriminate” against homosexuals. Individual believers who disapprove of homosexual relationships may face a choice at work between forfeiting their freedom of speech and being fired. 4. Fewer people would marry.
In Massachusetts, where same-sex “marriages” began in May 2004, only 52% of same-sex couples who live together had even bothered to “marry” by the end of 2006. Among opposite-sex couples, the comparable figure is 91%. In the Netherlands, the figures are even lower, with only 12% of homosexual couples having entered legal civil “marriages.” Giving the option of same-sex “marriage” would tell society that marriage in general is “optional,” not normative, and fewer people would marry.
5. Fewer people would remain monogamous and sexually faithful. Among homosexual men, sex with multiple partners is tolerated and often expected. One study in the Netherlands showed that homosexual men with a steady partner had an average of eight sexual partners per year. If these behaviours are incorporated into what society affirms as “marriage,” then fidelity among heterosexuals would likely decline as well. 6. Fewer people would remain married for a lifetime.
Even a homosexual psychologist has acknowledged that “gay and lesbian couples dissolve their relationships more frequently than heterosexual couples.” The same Dutch study that showed the high rate of homosexual promiscuity also showed that the average homosexual male “partnership” lasts only 1.5 years. As the transience of homosexual relationships is incorporated in society’s image of “marriage,” we can expect that fewer heterosexuals would maintain a lifelong commitment.
7. Fewer children would be raised by a married mother and father. Social science has clearly proven clearly that children do best when raised by their own married biological mother and father. Yet legalizing same-sex “marriage” would put an official stamp of approval on the deliberate creation of permanently motherless or fatherless families. As scholar Stanley Kurtz says, this “would likely speed us on the way towards more frequent out-of-wedlock birth, and skyrocketing family dissolution.” 8. More children would grow up fatherless.
Most children who live with only one biological parent will live with their mothers, and lesbian couples are more likely to be raising children than homosexual male couples. Therefore, with same-sex “marriage,” more children would suffer the specific negative consequences of fatherlessness, which include higher rates of youth incarceration among males and adolescent pregnancy among females. Research also shows negative outcomes for the children of sperm donors, who are used by some lesbian couples. 9. Birth rates would fall.
Same-sex “marriage” would eliminate the incentive for procreation that is implicit in defining marriage as a male-female union. There is already evidence of at least a correlation between same-sex “marriage” and low birth and fertility rates, both in the U.S. and abroad. While some people still harbour outdated fears about “over-population,” demographers now understand that declining birth rates harm society. 10. Demands for legalization of polygamy would grow.
If a person’s choice of spouse cannot be limited based on the sex of one’s partner, it is hard to see how it could be limited based on the number of spouses either. This argument is already being pressed in the courts.
About same sex marriage
The first laws in modern times enabling same-sex marriage were enacted during the first decade of the 21st century. As of 19 August 2013, fifteen countries (Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, Uruguay), and several sub-national jurisdictions (parts of Mexico and the United States), allow same-sex couples to marry. A law has been passed by the United Kingdom, effective in England and Wales, which is expected to be fully in force in 2014. Polls in various countries show that there is rising support for legally recognizing same-sex marriage across race, ethnicity, age, religion, political affiliation, and socioeconomic status. Introduction of same-sex marriage laws has varied by jurisdiction, being variously accomplished through a legislative change to marriage laws, a court ruling based on constitutional guarantees of equality, or by direct popular vote (via a ballot initiative or a referendum).
The recognition of same-sex marriage is a political, social, human rights and civil rights issue, as well as a religious issue in many nations and around the world, and debates continue to arise over whether same-sex couples should be allowed marriage, be required to hold a different status (a civil union), or be denied recognition of such rights. Some analysts state that financial, psychological and physical well-being are enhanced by marriage, and that children of same-sex couples benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union supported by society’s institutions. Court documents filed by American scientific associations also state that singling out gay men and women as ineligible for marriage both stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against them. The American Anthropological Association avers that social science research does not support the view