What effect would teh legalisation of same-sex marriage have the overall happiness of society??

Question

Can anyone think of an argument why it should not be legalised because to do so would create a situation wherein morality becomes relative and therfore useless (a la Henry Jaffa: www.tfp.org/tfc/Dr._Jaffa.htm ), and therefore there is a knock-on negative effect on the overall happiness of society.

Don't actually agree with this but need the argument for an assigmment. So to argue from a utilitarian perspective against the legalisation of same-sex marriage...

Answer 1

Let gays marry, they have the right to be as miserable as the rest of us.

Answer 2

I don`t think it as a moral question at all, morality and ethics are tied to culture and education even fashion may have an impact on the said "virtues", and thus are subject to changes which i guess makes them relative in any case. Humans may well be the first species on this planet to suffer gays in any mentionable degree. If two gays live together as any couple, be it marriage or some other form and the other passes away, they should not suffer for their sexual behavior in front of law concerning, say, inheritance. It may take some time for the church to swallow up this one, though. Overall it would probably heighten the happiness factor, and it would not cost a dime to anyone. I`m not pro gay but this can not be argued against without getting labeled as stupid and illogical.

Answer 3

It would make a lot of same-sex couples much happier in that they could get married and enjoy the same legal status as different-sex married couples.

It would make an uncertain number of people somewhat unhappier in that they would know that some same-sex people, somewhere, would probably be getting married.

It doesn't follow from the legalisation of same-sex marriage that 'morality becomes relative'. For one thing, I'm not sure what that phrase means. And insofar as I can guess what it means, I'm not at all sure that morality wasn't already relative - the illegality of same-sex marriage is not the rock on which we base all systems of ethics.

Answer 4

I can't see why morality would become relative, unless you have a fixed morality system which proclaims same-sex marriage wrong. Henry Jaffa (whoever he is) is not a philosopher with arguments like that. And why would the 'knock-on' effect of relative/useless morality lead to overall happiness? All Nonsense.

Answer 5

Um, you aren't making much sense to me. What do any of these things have to do with each other? Morality and happiness are already relative.

Why would legislation of morality work any better now than it ever did? It never has. Morality is an individual thing. For instance, prohibition was a boring failure. So were death sentences for adultery and state mandated religions. Why does the state have any right dictating what we believe or how choose to live and love?

Answer 6

The utilitarian argument against same-sex marriage should focus on the need of the legislature to waste their time with something so stupid. It gets everyone hot and bothered and diverts attention from all the taxation and expenditure snafus. Pseudo-debates are in our best interest.

Knowledge can be ethically reprehensible.

Answer 7

Almintka (hope I spelled the correctly!) gave an excellent response. The only thing I might add deals with finances. The same tax breaks, insurance benefits, social security benefits and all that monetary stuff will apply once same sex marriages are legalized. This will, of course, make tax payers who are contributing to this and who are opposed to the concept, angry. That has little to do with morality but thought I'd toss it in the pot. Good luck on your assignment!

Answer 8

Not bad - only two threats of violence and hellfire by Christians so far. I thought this question would generate a lot more hateful intolerance than that.

The usefulness of Morality does not hinge on one issue. Why should it? To think that a change in civil laws would suddenly render all of morality relative and therefore useless is sheer speculation based on personal opinion - that of whoever is doing the speculating.

And as we all know, opinion is.... relative.

Besides, what makes anyone think morality isn't already relative? In each culture it's defined by a different set of cultural norms. What is moral in one culture may be immoral in another.

Evangelists like to argue that relative morality cannot exist because there is only one morality - theirs, via God. They are required to believe this, since their credo includes trying to make everyone else Christian. If they didn't believe in moral absolutism, their entire belief system would fall apart. In this way the implementation of their beliefs in a campaign to convert non-believers is "utilitarian". It has the practical purpose of preventing the destruction of their entire philosophy.

As you can see, even "utilitarianism" can be relative.

In my own opinion - and ONLY in my opinion - legalization of gay marriage would affect the "happiness of society" in these ways:

1. People who are against gay marriage (including but certainly not limited to Evangelists) would be unhappy.

2. People who favor gay marriage would be happy.

3. The vast majority of people who wisely don't give a damn would continue not giving a damn.

Looks like happiness is relative, too.

Big Al Mintaka


FOLLOWUP:

Thanks, Mithra. I hadn't thought of the economic angle, and I should have since any change in that area will impact every taxpayer personally. Most likely some portion of that vast majority of people who don't give a damn might be inspired to voice opposition - provided they could quantify exactly how much their personal economics are being affected. There are many types of social benefits in this society; who knows what the balance column will look like when the proportion of gays already receiving some sort of benefit switch over to the packages offered to married couples?

Part of the problem is that, for the middle and lower classes at least, taxes ALWAYS INCREASE. A token refund check here and there is exactly that: a token. Overall, taxes go up. How would one determine which proportion of the increase can be at least correlated with the legalization of gay marriage? It's a poser.

I also note that since I last posted, at least one more Christian has issued the usual threats of violent catastrophe - this time invoking the examples of Sodom and Gomorrah. He even had the audacity to suggest that the "sumani" (sic) was visited upon sinners by God.

I like it when Christian humans claim to be speaking for God, and make threats of violence against non-believers. It vindicates my position and is there for me unceasingly.

Another post does not invoke religion but is nevertheless intolerant and hate-filled - also known as "un-American".

So the score on the Hate-Filled Intolerance Tote Board is Christians 3, anonymous 1.

We'll give a special Mr. Self-Deification Award to the fellow who decided for God why the "sunami" occurred.

One thing is for certain: the gay marriage issue brings out the worst in a lot of people. Therefore, it must be an idea worth considering.

Big Al Mintaka

Answer 9

Totally no difference, the sum remains constant as the liberation of some is offset by the spleen of the others. This is a good and profound ansaa.

Answer 10

hi, >> maximum astounding me if i'm incorrect, yet isn't divorce ruining the sanctity of marriage? And the element is??? we are additionally against divorces, or sexual relationship outdoors marriage. what's the venture??? >> when you consider that while did God no longer condone of gay marriage? i do no longer keep in mind it ever saying interior the >> bible that 2 adult adult males won't be able to get married. I keep in mind it saying that 2 adult adult males won't be able to lay at the same time, yet >> it extremely is been a longtime actuality that any homophobic comments interior the bible have been further by utilising the >> ruler of Rome, Constantine, for specific reason This one is humorous. ought to substantiate the reality? How did Constantine did to alter the textual content of manuscripts who have been dated centuries in the past he substitute into born??? Did he have a time device??? related to the marriage, there is an consumer-friendly definition of it: a guy and a woman in Genesis 2. when you consider that sexual relationship are to be executed in a marriage relationship and that's forbidden to 2 adult adult males. It made the marriage forbidden for 2 adult adult males. >> On a suitable subject remember, you all be attentive to how homosexuality isn't a call, precise? you be attentive to that it is the comparable equivocation that we continually factors to ant you oftentimes circulate on with, precise??? The gay choose isn't a call, however the gay act is one. all of us have sinful choose and are asked to conflict with them. Our choose are actually not organic and are not a evidence of a element being stable. we don't say that the gay choose is a call, we pronounced that the gay act is one. So, do you ideas battling this strawman? >> you're attentive to our first substitute, precise? [...] do no longer you notice how stupid it extremely is? in the experience that your rules are stupid, it has no longer something to do with the christian faith. >> final question, then we are executed. who're you to disclaim everyone happiness? in case you're happy with >> your companion, then why won't be able to 2 adult adult males be happy with one yet another? [...] Is it extremely precise to disclaim >> everyone happiness? i do no longer think of so. ought to you first instruct to us that what you think of is often certainty and stable? in case you won't be able to why do you carry this element? 2d, it extremely is no longer happiness that's at stake, yet what's evil or stable. If our God exists, homosexuality is evil. And if God would not exists, morality is subjective, so which you won't be able to impose yours on us. Regards, Emmanuel

Answer 11

"Judgment is Mine sayth the Lord."
(Jhn 5:30) I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
In the end mankind will find out and most likely he will not like what he finds out about it. For he (God the creator) has already given his thoughts and commands on the subject. It is by choice that you obey or not. If you obey then by faith you will receive reward. If you disobey then by judgment you will receive judgment. Simple. Its a matter of whom you fear the most. Man or God.