Gay Marriage

Same Sex Marriage: The Outrageous Decision
Marriage is a unique practice, it is both a religious sacrament and legal registration controlled by the state. For the time being, marriage is defined by “84% of the population as the union of two people of the opposite sex" (Johnson 49). Therefore, by definition, marriage has to be different sex.
The definitionof homosexuality is "exhibiting sexual desire toward another of the same sex" (Webster's New World Dictionary 673). Throughout human history, according to religious tradition and as a matter of natural law, marriage has been tied to potential procreative sexuality, which is a monopoly held by different-sex couples. Under this definitional objection, "the state cannot recognize something that is animpossibility" (Eskridge p.87).
The argument of same-sex marriage is important, not only for the religious and legal precedent, but because the welfare of families, especially the interest of children, may be profoundly affected by the proposals before Hawaii's courts and the state legislature relating to same-sex marriage.
"In 1993, three same-sex couples (NiniaBaehr, Genora Dancel, Tammy Rodrigues, Antoinette Pregil, Pat Lagon and Joseph Melilio) applied for marriage licenses from the State of Hawaii; they were rejected. They then challenged the state's decision in court. This set in motion a chain of events: the case was appealed to the Hawaii Supreme Court (Baehr v. Miike; action #15689) which ruled on May 27, 1993 that the state's refusal to grantmarriage licenses was unconstitutional. It violated the Hawaiian Constitution's equal protection guarantees (Article I, Section 5) against gender discrimination. The court remanded the case to the Circuit Court, stating that licenses should be issued to same-sex couples, unless the state can show a compelling interest in banning such marriages" (Hawaii´s Future Today). Same sex marriages are nowtheoretically legal in Hawaii.
The suggestion that the state has no real interest in marriage is a stunning repudiation of the unique contributions of heterosexual marriage to society, to the state, and to the individual. The marriage of a man and woman has long been favored because it provides the most favorable setting in which to conceive and raise children. Child development isskewed, scarred or retarded when a father or mother is absent in the household. Children, moreover, are the most numerous and innocent victims of the current cultural disintegration of marriage. Indeed, the impoverishment of children has been shown to be a direct result of changed in family structure that have undermined and destabilized marriage over the past three decades. To halt this trend the lawshould clearly and unequivocally convey the message that the best interest of a child demands both a mother and a father. In an era where fathers are abandoning their children in unprecedented numbers and where mothers are opting to parent without the support of a husband, it would be irresponsible to adopt a marital policy which sends the misleading message that a mother and a father are not bothimportant to the welfare of children.
All children need to connect emotionally with their parents, especially their same-sex parent. This relationship is a vital part in the process of growing to feel complete and secure as males and females. When a child grows up feeling emotionally cut off from his or her same-sex parent, it interrupts this process. If the distance continues, theprocess never resumes, leaving a child feeling rejected, empty, and insecure as a boy or girl.

The homosexual community speaks of itself as struggling for civil rights. "The gay community's goal is integration just as it was with Martin Luther King” argues homosexual activist Harry Britt (Horowitz 72). Far from seeking integration with the heterosexual world, it vehemently avoids...