Legislation says that marriage is between a man and a woman, not between two people, and it is worded that way to purposely exclude homosexuals. By denying this to homosexuals we are excluding and therefore punishing them for their choices.
John Stuart Mill created the ‘harm principle’ in the 19th century. He said that "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”, which means law should only restrict things which harm people. This principle is the foundation for much of modern law. How does homosexual marriage harm anyone? No one is hurt or disadvantaged by homosexual married, so then it a victimless crime. Because it’s a victimless crime there should be no laws against it.
The Report of the Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution, published in the UK, called for the decriminalization and end to discrimination of homosexuality because it is a victimless crime. Many other countries have used this same reasoning to also decriminalizes and end discrimination against homosexuals. Homosexuals’ having equal rights to heterosexuals, including the right to marry, harms no one In the Chinese society and so it should not be illegal in China.
I absolutely agree with you. Why should people be put under pressure to conform to a restricting society for such an innocent and helpless and unharmful decision? I do believe however that society is loosening up and that it is slowly being more socially accepted as time goes on.
回覆刪除That is true Zane. Having same sex marriages won't have a cataclysmic or world ending impact on the world. It's just that the mass of the population isn't used to the thought of same-sex relationships having equal rights. Over time things may change but there will always be people who will discriminate.
回覆刪除This is a highly controversial topic, not only dealing with the surface issue of the legislation but with religion, war, government and society. I'm looking forward to reading more, keep it up!
I totally agree with you. Marriage should be a celebration of love between two people. But marriage is a religious institute and not a governmental one. While I do feel marriage should be open to an two consenting adults as a gay person myself I am more than happy with the concept of a civil union. It gives me all the same rights and ceremony, it just removes the God aspect. That I feel a government should allow.
回覆刪除That's fine TCJ, If you are happy with a civil union then good for you. But some gay people are not satisfied with that; they want to get fully married like a straight couple. And for those people, they should have the right to do it. And marriage is not a religious institute. Some religions do not include marriage in their institution. And marriage has existed in many cultures before as a secular thing. Marriage is a legal and social institution, not a religious one.
回覆刪除I want to say, if marriage is just about religion and civil unions are equal. Then why do atheist heterosexual couples usually get married not civil union? Most atheist couples will choose marriage over civil union because marriage is not just about religion, and homosexual couples should be able to make that choice as well.
^~^