Category: Marriage

Introduction

The topic of the same-sex marriage has attracted heated debate over the years in the US. The protagonists and antagonists of this marriage institution have always clashed over moral standards of the society. In defining homosexual marriage, anthropologists formulate valid cross-cultural variations of modern and traditional forms. Same-sex marriage, just like any other form of marriage, is a union of two adults, in a domestic arrangement with each member having defined roles to play.

Over the years, homosexual couples have raised debates in the conservative American society. Specifically, religious and conservative groups have been the most active in opposing homosexual couples getting married. Despite these divergent opinions, homosexual couples have spread across several states in the US. Same-sex marriage is now legal in the states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Vermont and Massachusetts. This paper supports the argument that marriage of homosexual couples should be allowed. The tenet of this position is based on basic human rights, the religious freedom of choice, and personal conscious in the face of choices.

Reasons for Supporting Same-Sex Marriage

Personal Conscious

Same sex marriage, just like any other form of marriage, is a union of two adults of the same sex in a domestic arrangement with each member having defined roles to play. Every person has the right to practice personal choice as long as the it does not affect the other parties. Apparently, same-sex marriage results from agreement between two adults without any coercion. It is practiced by adults who follow their free will of choice.

Apparently, there has never been any scientific research that confirms the common perception that same-sex marriage is destroying the social fabric. Since those involved in same-sex marriage are similar to those involved on other forms of marriages, it is fair to respect the choice of these consenting adults since perception or pedigree of morality is relative to lines of thought by a group of persons, who may be influenced by inner prejudice rather than facts.

For instance, the common ground for opposing same-sex marriage has been the defilement of the social norms. In reality, persons propagating such arguments are inspired by fear of what they do not understand. Therefore, promoting same sex-marriage will reverse the current perception that it is evil or against the norms of the society since all the stakeholders will embrace homosexuality as a normal relationship.

Religious freedom of choice

Despite the heated debate by nearly all religions across the globe in protest against same-sex marriage, there is no evidence from the religious teachings opposing the practice. For instance, in the Christian faith, there are only one or two verses in the entire Bible mentioning homosexuality and it is barely a topic in the holy book. Apparently, biblical literalism can be blamed for demonizing homosexuality. Besides, most fundamental Christians are hypocrites who have discarded all the other topics in the tome of the good book apart from the one or two verses on homosexuality. Thus, selective amnesia only promotes literalism instead of contextualism. In most cases, the consequences of socially constructing homosexuals and homosexuality as an abomination is destroying family relationships and promoting discrimination of the homosexuals by the society.

The relations in the family institution may also be strained since no one would want to accept or associate with homosexuals as members of such families. On the other hand, constructing homosexuality as an abomination may open the door for abuse of gay rights by their opponents. The abuse may be in the form of discrimination from participating in social events, religious activities, and free interaction. In fact, the society may internalize the selective amnesia approach when relating to the homosexuals irrespective of their feelings and freedom of religious choice. Just like any straight couple, same-sex marriage arises from exercising the freedom of religious choice at personal level. In my opinion, it would be very wrong to discredit the same-sex marriage as an institution on the basis of selective amnesia when those who are victimized have not committed any crime. Besides, the First Amendment of the constitution clearly states that a persons religious views or lack thereof must be protected (Sherkat, Vries, and Creek 15).

It is unfair to declare a marriage by two consenting adults as against religious fundamentalism when the parties involved are dedicated members of a particular faith. Therefore, there has never been any convincing religious view that discredits same-sex marriage, apart from wrong perceptions from those who cannot appreciate and respect the rights of others to religious freedom. Since marriage is a lay activity, it would be wrong for any government to pass laws against same-sex marriage just to satisfy the perceptions of some few individuals on the basis of religious disagreement.

Same-sex marriage and the basic fundamental rights

The basic fundamental rights include the respect of choice such as being part of same-sex marriage. Basically, there are several benefits that come as a result of same-sex marriage just like any other form of marriage. For instance, those involved in this form of marriage have rights to own joint property and be part of any activity that the straight couples are involved in. Therefore, any decision to oppose same-sex marriage falls in the category of minority discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Basically, denying marriage to a homosexual couple is no different than denying marriage to Hispanic or black couples (Hunter 1862).

Since marriage is founded on the basis of love, such form of discrimination may deny persons of same-sex the right to enjoy this basic fundamental right, despite the fact that this type of union is not criminalized in the US bill of rights. Since same sex marriage has been legalized in several states in the US, it may become an important institution that promotes creation of strong values in the family to minimize risks associated with risky sexual activities. For instance, the problems related to sexuality in our society such as STDs stem from carefree, frivolous lifestyles; in other words, having frequent, unprotected sex with many partners. Marriage encourages people to settle down and to give up that type of lifestyle (Baker 7).

Potential of increasing child adoptions

Since same-sex marriage involves persons who cannot procreate as a result of sharing similar sexual orientation, there is potential of increasing the number of orphan children being adopted into functional families. In the case where same-sex couples wants a child, there are several avenues available in the form of adoption. As more children become adopted into such families, more orphans are given the opportunity to fully belong to a family as opposed to spending the rest of their lives in the orphanages. Basically, since there are so many kids around the country in need of adoption, this is a good thing (Greenberg 36).Through continued adoption of children, same-sex marriages may fill the gap that is current taken by the overcrowded and often underfunded orphanage institutions. From a fundamentalist perspective, this is an impetus towards strengthening the family bonds.

Conclusion

In summary, my stand on homosexuality is that it is free will practice which men and women engage in a like. The basis of participating in homosexuality has little to do with coercion, but self consciousness and need to curve a unique culture among the characters who explore their sexuality. Therefore, men and women are equal partners in the homosexuality and straightness since the bodies of the homosexuals are their right, as long as self consciousness forms part of the right.

This means that homosexuals are free beings in the society with an equal space as the straights to discover, experience, and willingly participate in sexual episodes with persons of their choice as long as the other party is a consenting adult. Besides, numerous personal and political benefits homosexuals get include marriage, property inheritance, and recognition as equals in the society within the laws in the US. The antagonists of same-sex marriage dismissed the homosexuals as contributors to weird sexism and hideous devilish acts. However, these harsh perceptions are influenced by opinions which cannot be quantified. The paper has shaded light on the rights of the homosexual such respect and acceptance, free will, and freedom in the face of the changing society. The need to protect these rights formed the rationale for my position of supporting same-sex marriage.

Works Cited

Baker, Brittney. Same-Sex Marriage and Religion: An Inappropriate Relationship. e- Research, 1.3 (2010): 1-9. Print.

Greenberg, David. The construction of homosexuality, Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 2009. Print.

Hunter, Nan. The future impact of same-sex marriage: More questions than answers. The George Town Law Journal, 100.1(2012): 1855-1879. Print.

Sherkat, Darren, Kylan Vries, and Stacia Creek. Race, religion, and opposition to same-sex marriage. OpenSIU Journal, 1.4 (2009): 1-35. Print.

Purpose of the research

In the research paper, Same-Sex Marriage in Canada, Makarenko (2007) focused on the analysis of historical and legal processes that culminated in the legalization of same-sex marriages in the country. The authors objectives were to illustrate and evaluate some important court cases that revolutionized the definitions of marriage in the country.

Research Methodology

The research paper used a meta-analysis of related studies to generate a qualitative methodology. According to Bryman (2012), the literature review can be used as a research methodology when a systematic review of related theories and studies is believed to address the research objectives. The author started the study by analyzing the historical transformations in the countrys legal systems. Additionally, some of the important court cases were reviewed to generate a legal perspective of same-sex marriages in the 1970s. In fact, the methodology focused on the changes to social behaviors that compelled Canadas legal system to redefine marriage laws.

Most of the literature review methods are descriptive because they provide facts that are used to describe social changes (Murray, Linden, & Kendall, 2014). Additionally, the methodology extends the scope of research while reducing the chances of bias. In this paper, the topic addressed social and cultural issues. In fact, the purpose of the research focused on reviewing the historical and legal changes that led to the acceptance of gays and lesbians in the marriage act.

The objectives differed significantly with those presented by MacIntosh, Reising, and Andruff (2010) in similar research on same-sex marriage in Canada. Whereas Makarenko (2007) focused on reviewing the historical and legal transformations, MacIntosh et al. (2010), focused on assessing relationship satisfaction and attachment among same-sex couples. Some of the advantages of using a literature review are the low risk of bias, the ability to evaluate longitudinal data, and the availability of resources.

Data collection

Makarenko (2007) compiled and analyzed some of the most relevant court cases that addressed same-sex marriage. The ethnography technique was used to identify resources addressing social, cultural, and group diversities. The method focuses on the social and cultural dimensions affecting human interactions (Heritage, 2013). A critical case sampling model was used to identify particular materials related to the research topic. For example, he identified Everett Klipperts case essential in triggering public debate that culminated in the first amendments to Canadas criminal law.

Additionally, the author focused on the sequential legislative reforms that followed the decriminalization of homosexuality. Historical and legal materials were identified for review. Government publications, court rulings, and publications from civil rights organizations are some of the documents included in the review. The resources were selected based on the relationship between the contents and the research topic. The author omitted non-legal and informal publications from the list and concentrated on the official debates in the House of Commons, judicial rulings, and political movements that transformed the marriage laws.

Appropriateness of data collection technique

The data collection process used was appropriate because it helped the researcher to narrow down the resources to the most detailed, essential, and appropriate. The social topic addressed the changes to human relationships and the increasing popularity of same-sex marriages. Ethnomethodology was crucial to assess the legal disputes that were being experienced in the country. Additionally, the critical sampling technique narrowed down the literature to official publications, legislation, and judicial rulings.

Ethical issues

The ethical issues were insignificant because the author focused on secondary sources. According to Liyanagunawardena, Adams, and Williams (2013), ethical issues are common in primary sources. Additionally, they emerge when dealing with human participants. However, the research focused on legal and historical literature. The author provided active website links to some of the official publications, legal amendments, and marriage laws.

The links were meant to enhance the readers ability to access the original materials. Additionally, the links showed that the author recognized the efforts and ownership of original publishers. Although the individuals mentioned in the court cases were not contacted when publishing the paper, the author used the facts as presented in the official justice publications. Additionally, most of the articles used are available to the public and do not require any form of authorization to use or replicate in research.

Findings and Conclusions

The research found that a series of legal conflicts led to a rise in civil movements that campaigned against the criminalization of homosexuality. In fact, Klipperts case was significant in shaping the position of homosexuality in Canadas legal system. Whereas the law considered homosexuality illegal and a criminal offense, the justice minister, Trudeau decriminalized the behavior terming it a social condition that did not concern the criminal code.

The decriminalization amendment increased the confidence of homosexuals who used civil rights organizations, political parties, and court cases to reverse the definitions of marriage in the country. Additionally, the issue of homosexuality was interpreted within the frameworks of rights and freedom. The House of Commons was engaged in a series of debates that culminated in the ratification of the Civil Marriage Act in 2005.

Scholarly research in academic journals

Scholarly research is published in academic journals to create opportunities for review, critique, and sharing knowledge among scholars. Most of these studies present primary sources that are essential for expanding knowledge in a particular academic discipline. The academic journals prevent misguiding, and unverifiable articles from being distributed to innocent readers. They verify the authenticity and credibility of articles before publishing.

References

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Heritage, J. (2013). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202-227.

MacIntosh, H., Reissing, E. D., & Andruff, H. (2010). Same-sex marriage in Canada: The impact of legal marriage on the first cohort of gay and lesbian Canadians to wed. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 19(3), 79-90.

Makarenko, J. (2007). Same-Sex Marriage in Canada. 

Murray, J. L., Linden, R., & Kendall, D. (2014). Sociology in Our times. Toronto, Canada: Nelson.

All human beings are born with equal rights despite their sexual preference! Since the 1900s, homosexual people have become increasingly popular but highly resisted. Improving rights for people of the LGBTQ+ community is a critical human right issue. In some countries, people are still imprisoned and even killed for their sexual orientation. Even in places where it isn’t illegal, they face violence and social stigma by the political system and society. Due to these challenges, they fought to have the same marital and parental rights as heterosexual people. But how does society look upon them and their children? Can they be good parents?

“We won marriage, and people thought the fight was over,” Ms.Eisenberg said. “But having to adopt your own child feels way more invasive, upsetting, disturbing” (Same-Sex Parents Still Face Legal Complications, 2020) Family isn’t determined solely on blood relations, therefore homosexual parenting should be legalized in all parts of the world because they are just as good as heterosexual parents, and can be better in some ways and can provide a second chance for children waiting to be adopted. Unfortunately, people still believe that same-sex parents aren’t able to nurture a child properly without the presence of the opposite gender in their family dynamics. This can make it very hard for both parents and children to live their life without fear of discrimination.

There are 3 major concerns about same-sex parents that are commonly voiced (Falk 1994; Patterson, Fulcher and Wain Right, 2002). Namely:

1. Homosexuals are mentally ill;
2. Lesbians are less maternal than heterosexual women;
3. Same-sex couples leave little time for their kids.

But, research has failed to provide proof for any of these concerns. Firstly, homosexuality is not a psychological disorder! (Conger 1975). The psychiatric, psychological professions don’t consider homosexuality as a mental disorder since years ago the American Psychiatric Association removed “homosexuality” from its list of mental disorders. Regarding the 2nd concern, there is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to sexual orientation. Homosexual parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide love and healthy environments for their children(Patterson,2000,2004). Similarly, same-sex relationships have not found to detract from their ability to care for their children (Bos et al, 2004).

In fact, in certain ways, same-sex parenting skills are superior to those of heterosexual couples because they rarely become parents by accident therefore they tend to be more motivated and committed than heterosexual parents. Kids of gay parents have the advantage of open-minded and patient role models of equitable relationships. A homosexual parent will be able to relate to the child more if he/she is facing internal conflicts; whether it is sexual orientation or self-identity, as they have experienced it themselves thus making the child feel comfortable talking to their parent. Many heterosexual parents fail in this aspect. Usually, children of same-sex parents feel less pressure placed on them from gender stereotypes, as their parents have fewer expectations for the child to act like their biological gender role.

Unfortunately, there are disadvantages as well, that is children of same-sex parents might be more vulnerable to mental breakdowns, behavior problems and be less psychologically healthy than other children. But if there’s any disadvantage that is due to the prejudice and discrimination by society. Discrimination against their parents deprives children of benefits and privileges enjoyed by children of heterosexual couples. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with parenting. So let’s not hate or discriminate against any same-sex couples or their children and give everyone an equal chance to showcase their talent and be successful!

Can you ever imagine wanting to get married to the person you love no matter what gender they are? Well, people who love someone who is their same sex and want to marry them used to be in denial just because they were the same sex. Same sex couples just was to be free in the same way heterosexual couples do. Yes, marriage is different from love because you are making a commitment with a person and staying with them until death has separated you. Many states ban same-sex marriage because they just believe that marriage is between a man and a woman when it truly isnt but only in their perspective. Same-sex marriage was first legalized in the 21st century and it is now available in 28 countries. In fact, would you want to marry the person you love? And what about if you were being stopped because you weren’t getting married as a heterosexual couple. Therefore, Marriage Equality should be allowed because they should have the same rights as heterosexual couple and the right to marry someone they want to have a commitment with. There should be no legal restrictions on marriage rights anywhere which means like the entire world.

Marriage Equality which is also known as gay or same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage should have the same rights as everyone else. There was a lot of discrimination against the same-sex couple because many states are prohibiting and are basically having no exemptions, just like the liscense to discriminate. When the year of 2015 came the Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage). In fact, 486,000 of same-sex couples got married by October 2015, which wasn’t that long from when the supreme court passed it. Same-sex couples had to fight for in order to get married. Why couldn’t it be treated as a normal right just like if it were between a man and a woman? We are all the same people, but may like someone else who is not the opposite gender as them. Same-sex couples are such great people just like anyother couple. They have the right to feel free and love whoever they want.

Same sex marriage should be legal, as it offers equal benefits for everyone. Until legalization in the US, there were no hospital visitation rights for homosexual couples. It means that a person was not allowed to visit his life partner if an accident arose because they were not legally married. Legalizing gay marriage also includes revenue, inheritance benefits.

Same-sex couples are no different from a man and a woman. Yes, people may think that a child may need a mother and a father figure, but in reality there are great parents who know how to love and parent their children which means they can be same-sex parents. When it comes to same sex couples wanting to adopt, it becomes an issue in some states because they ban gay adoption. And apparently adoption can only happen between a heterosexual couple. Gay couples that want to adopt have the same excitement and feelings as a heterosexual couple. In fact when children are getting raised by gay and lesbian parents they are more open to diversity and more caring for younger children. Studies indicate that gay people’s financial, psychological, and physical well-being is improved by marriage, and that same-sex parents ‘ children benefit from being born within a military union accepted by law and by societal institutions. The Children Welfare League of America’s Standards of Excellence for Adoption Services say that applicants that want to adopt as a parent they should be allowed to and children need parents who will love them and nourish them. Their race, ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation shouldn’t matter in becoming a parent. Gay couples have been discriminated against by these organizations but being able to marry legally removes the reason why they should not be allowed to adopt. Same sex couples often transition towards adoption, because raising their first baby can be complex. The improvement of adoption rates means that more children have parents to truly care for them, rather than live in foster care that transfers from one family to another. Negating children to live in a happy home and parents who love them is not sensible. If gay couples have a baby, whether by adopting or surrogacy, the baby is desired beyond belief. These parents will be dedicated as parents and ready to bring the baby into this world. There will be no ‘errors’ falling through the cracks, as the parents will not risk the child’s upbringing. Any child who is parented by a gay couple will be granted stronger affection than he is likely to be able to cope. Being raised by same sex parents shouldnt be the problem because the children will be loved and cared for.⠀

Another problem that is also common with marriage equality is that their employer discriminates because they are either gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. The biggest employer that discriminates against people no matter what sexual orientation you are is the military. Thousands of military members have been discharged from the military because of the policy and many of them didn’t show their identity and who they truly were and that’s why they were discharged from the military. About 17,000 men and women were discharged. In a way Marriage Equality boosts up our economy. It is reasonably argued by those who are pro-sex marriage that it is economically beneficial. While having a positive impact on wedding expenses, higher partnerships mean higher taxes for those filing that together cause an increase in tax revenues. Another economic advantage is increased productivity, and increased labor mobility. Productivity increases with the absence of a bias from the position of workplace. Why do people get discriminated against just because of their sexual orientation?

Same sex marriage shouldn’t be legal because marriage is between a man and a woman. Well your wrong because same sex couples benefit us in many ways. There are studies shown that same sex parents benefit more in adoption because children will become more open and more diverse in this society than being parented by a man and a woman. And child support became an issue for heterosexual parents when it comes to splitting up. Same sex couples need to feel free from being discriminated because we all have the same rights as everyone else but some people will discriminate. People also have to see it from their perspective and what is they were in their shoes. They wouldn’t like being discriminated against.

In conclusion, no relationship is greater than marriage, because it represents the universal values of affection, loyalty, commitment, sacrifice and family. Two men become something greater when they form a marital union than they once were. As some of the petitioners show in these situations, marriage represents a love which can survive even past death. Those men and women would be mistaken to say they disrespect the idea of matrimony. An argument is that they love it, respect it so intensely that they seek to find for themselves a fulfillment. A vision is not to be blamed for living in solitude, away from one of the oldest institutions in society. In the eyes of the law they are demanding equal integrity. The Constitution gives them the right to. Marriage equality should be free with no limits because no one wants to live with limits and they want to feel free and be seen as a normal person. Marriage Equality should have no limitations anywhere in any country. Since gay marriage in our country is always contradictory, such claims do not seem to end. While some people believe that the validity of same-sex marriage damages the integrity of marriage, some people think that same-sex marriage is legal. Different American religious groups and their adherents prefer to accept or strongly oppose gay marriage, in accordance with their views and beliefs. However there is constant discussion between these groups. These two parties are still debating the feasibility of same-sex marriage and do not seem to be reaching consensus.

Same-sex marriage can be defined as the kind of marriage where two people of the same biological sex enter into a matrimonial union. There are many reasons why a couple may opt to be joined in a same-sex marriage, the social preference, social influence, and gender dysphoria, among many others. The notion of same-sex marriage has existed since ancient times. Same-sex marriage was not openly discussed in most social circles because of government directives and it was simply not ‘socially acceptable’. In the past, most traditional socio-cultural practices and beliefs shunned the idea of same-sex marriages, almost always due to religious beliefs. The same views were adopted by governments around the world, thus making same-sex marriages an offense. However, things have drastically changed in today’s world, where most people are beginning to not only realize but also appreciate the need to understand and even legalize the practice of same-sex marriages. The 14th amendment of the American constitution advocates for the equal protection of all persons regardless of their background (Lupu, 2015). All persons should respect same-sex marriages and that they should be treated equally without any form of discrimination.

The main reason as to why the same-sex married couples should be respected and treated equally is because discriminating and stigmatizing them does not only degrade them to second class citizens; it also infringes on their rights to expression. This has made the people who want to be in a same-sex marriage lead low qualities of life as they are often afraid of coming out for fear of retribution that accompanies such confessions from both the society and the government. Most people, while busying themselves in the fight against discrimination, often fail to realize that the people who favor same-sex marriage also need to be respected and accepted by the society just the way that they are (Kollman, 2016). It is, therefore, paramount that the discrimination and stigma based on sexual orientation that is directed towards the people who favor same-sex marriages cease to ensure the safety and protection of all persons where equality is prioritized.

The second reason why same-sex marriages should be respected and treated equally is that even the institution of legal marriage, in itself, is secular (Kollman, 2016).With that being said, there is no reason for religious opinions to overshadow the law or be socially unaccepted more that a heterosexual marriage. When it comes to the issues of legalizing same-sex marriages, it is therefore essential that the matter is treated as secularly as the law that legalizes it.

Criticism

Most of the critics, who oppose same-sex marriage while not arguing on the religious standing of the practice, will often cite the need for children to have a mother and father to raise them. The critics often argue that the children raised by same-sex couples often face specific psychological difficulties in their lives that may expose them to future challenges, which may include sexual abuse and other relational difficulties (Light, 2015).

Conclusion

Couples in same-sex marriages are human too and have feelings just like other people in heterosexual relationships. They have their reasons for preferring the same-sex unions that they have entered into, and those reasons must be respected without any form of discrimination of stigma. The Supreme Court does not only recognize the union, but it is also a privilege and not a right and should be treated as such. Besides, same-sex couples are human like everyone else and have the capability of making excellent parents if they are allowed.

References:

1. Kollman, K. (2016). Same-sex unions: the globalization of an idea. The same-sex union’s revolution in western democracies. Manchester University Press.
2. Light, R. (2015). The scientific consensus, the law, and same-sex parenting outcomes. Social Science Research, 53, 300-310.
3. Lupu, I. C. (2015). Moving Targets: Obergefell, Hobby Lobby, and the Future of LGBT Rights. Ala. CR & CLL Rev., 7, 1.

Civic participation involves individuals advocating to make a change in the lives of the public and wider community through both political and non-political methods. Civic participation has played an integral role in the legalisation of same sex marriage through things such as social media and celebrities advocating for change, pride festivities such as the mardi gras and individuals from the community supporting the issue.

Social media is an integral part of modern society and has had an immense impact on the legalisation of same sex marriage. This is due to some celebrities using their platforms to advocate for LGBTQ+ rights, and thus influence their followers too. In her book “Same Sex Marriage and Social Media: How Online Networks Accelerated The Marriage Equality Movement”, Rhonda Gibson writes about how social media has addressed the issue of equality and marriage within the LGBTQ+ community. Some scholars are incredulous that social media should be considered political engagement. Malcolm Gladwell (2010) argues that the weak connections between people on social media are too inadequate to create the engagement needed to produce actual change, thus implying that social media essentially does not have an effect on the legalisation of same sex marriage (Gibson, 2018).

Despite this, however, civic participation on social media for the past 10 years has increased greatly, and campaigns launched solely on social media have gained great traction. The “Say Yes” Campaign was one of them, with millions of people around the world lobbying social media to allow the legalisation of same sex marriage. Openly gay celebrities such as Colton Haynes and Neil Patrick Harris as well as Australian celebrities like Margot Robbie and Chris Hemsworth showed their support online, thus increasing awareness of the issue, resulting in more people lobbying for the campaign.

Social media plays a vast role in civic participation in that it allows the general public to access and engage with politics with more ease and decide which political ideas they will associate themselves with. This particularly advantageous for the Same Sex Marriage movement as it provides the ease of civic participation with essentially a click of a button. Individuals may effectively become civic participants through a tweet posted or a Facebook post written, and these posts eventually led to the government announcing the introduction of the plebiscite in 2017, which thus elucidates the true influence of civic participation on the legalisation of same sex marriage.

Social events and pride festivities have also assisted in the legalisation of same sex marriage. The first Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras took place on the 24th of June 1978 and it was intended to be a peaceful protest against the criminalisation of homosexuality. However, 53 people were arrested, and their names, addresses and workplaces were published by the Sydney Morning Herald, resulting in malicious beatings (McCrossin, 2019). Despite this, the Mardi Gras celebrated its 40th anniversary in 2018. This event is integral to the LGBTQ+ community as it provides a safe space and platform for speaking about the injustices committed against the community as a whole, including the legalisation of same sex marriage within society. Julie McCrossin, an outspoken advocate for Marriage rights, spoke of the first Mardi Gras, saying that: “I wouldn’t describe it as a success. I would have described it as a traumatising experience because there was so much violence and people were actually hurt. It was intended as a celebration. Those who had been arguing for a gentler approach were shocked by the reaction they got.” (McCrossin, 2019). Despite the failures of the first Mardi Gras, it lives on today, and has had an immense influence on civic participation in raising awareness of the legalisation of same sex marriage. it has allowed LGBTQ+ youth to express their concerns about legislation protecting their community as well as lobby for increased rights and freedoms.

Although it is thought that contemporary society has accepted the LGBTQ+ community as equals, however that is still to be achieved. Attacks are extremely common around Mardi Gras weekend, and many have come close to death because of them. One of these people was Nicholas Bucknell, who spoke to Triple J, saying that his head was “bashed in” and that he thought “this is it. I was going to die” (Dias, 2019). This elucidates that despite the success of Civic participation leading to the legalisation of same sex marriage, Australia still has a long way to go in affording members of the LGBTQ+ community the same rights and freedoms as the rest of society.

In 2017, Australian citizens voted on a plebiscite which was to determine whether same sex marriage would be legalised in Australia. One politician who was determined to put a stop to the plebiscite was Malcolm Turnbull. He claimed that “[Tony Abbott] wants to have a plebiscite on same-sex marriage. I mean, this is ridiculous. The matter’s got to go to parliament” (Greewich and Robinson, 2018). However, despite his concerns, the plebiscite went through and was scheduled for late 2017. The plebiscite was not legally binding and was optional for people to fill out, and when it was announced, campaigns flooded television and social media. The two campaigns were the “Yes” campaign and the “No” campaign, and their premise was to encourage civic participation in order to either legalise same sex marriage or the opposite. This was seen when Jean-Jacques Fiasson transformed his home in Enmore, painting it all the colours of the LGBT flag, and he was recognised Australia-wide and praised for his efforts (Burke, 2017). This plebiscite gave young people in Australia the opportunity to have their voices heard in a way that they never had before, as this was an issue that directly affected almost all of them.

Some reasons why young people feel alienated from the political system in Australia are that they do not understand the system, they are isolated form politicians and the media, and arguably the biggest issue is that there is a widespread belief among young people that one person cannot make a proper difference or change in the community (Hallett, 1999). Because of this belief, the plebiscite aimed to specifically include young people and encourage them to vote, and it worked – according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, 81.1% of females and 75% of males aged 18-19 voted in the plebiscite, illuminating the true passion with which young people regard the legalisation of same sex marriage. The courts have the ability to overturn a law if they find adequate reason to do so. For every case that occurs in the public eye, there is some form of civic participation.

In 2013 the Australian Capital Territory passed the Marriage Equality (Same Sex) Act 2013 (ACT). However, in The Commonwealth v Australian Capital Territory, the High Court held that the act was inconsistent with the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) and rendered it “of no use” according to s 109 of the Australian constitution which states that “when a law of a statute is inconsistent with a law of the commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid” (McDonald and Chambers, 2014). This led to immense public outrage and protests to no avail. These protests led to the plebiscite, in which the majority of Australians voted “Yes”, thus resulting in the Marriage Amendment (Definition And Religious Freedoms) Act 2017 (Cth). This was an act of the parliament in Australia legalising same-sex marriages by amending the Marriage act 1961 (Cth) to allow marriage between two people regardless of gender. It also changed the definition of marriage in the act. Civic participation played an integral role in the implementation of this legislation. It occurred due to pressure being put on politicians from the public as well as protests, campaigns and current events.

In conclusion, civic participation has played an integral role in raising awareness of the legalisation of same sex marriage in Australia. Social media encourages individuals to put their political thoughts and ideas online, which resulted in the majority of the campaigns for the plebiscite happening online. Celebrities using their platforms in order to make a positive change and raise awareness for the issue has also been accommodating to the LGBTQ+ community. Social events and festivities such as the mardi gras have resulted in countless bouts of civic participation due to newfound confidence and support from the wider community. The plebiscite was a direct result of civic participation, and that resulted in the Marriage Amendment (Definition And Religious Freedoms) Act 2017, which achieved the goal that the community has been working towards for a myriad of years.

Introduction

The marriage institution has changed considerably over the world as a result of changes in marriage legislations in many countries in modern times. More than 21 countries of the world now recognise same sex partnership and marriages. Homosexuality has largely become both a current social phenomenon and a major change in the legal configuration of many countries of the world. The homosexual debate has broadly divided the world while some countries in Europe and the Americas have made protection for gay partners or legalized gay marriages but in many other countries, gay union carries serious penalties ranging from death sentence, imprisonment and is some cases, these laws are part of the criminal codes of the country as it applies in Nigeria, Yemen, Somalia and Sudan while in some cases they are recognised as civil unions and not as marriages as it applies in Czech Republic.

The first country to have legalised same sex marriage is the Netherlands, a decision which was followed by Belgium and later Spain and Canada before countries like Iceland, Argentina, Norway, South Africa, Portugal, Sweden, the United States and later Mexico followed to allow those who consider themselves as homosexuals be able to marry and live a life which they consider honourable and pleasurable. The legal changes made by these countries inspired several others like Ecuador, Uruguay, Hungary, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Andorra, Switzerland, Colombia, Finland, Austria, Green-land, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Ireland, Denmark, Germany, Isle of Man etc. to do same. In many of these countries, there is a nationwide accent to same sex marriage but in the United States, some states legislated the same sex marriage law while other states rejected it. Same sex marriage has been largely considered by activists as a civil right of citizens in any part of the world and this is largely considered an acceptance of people regardless of their sexual orientation preferences.

There has been an uneven spread in globally expansion of gay partners due to the fact that some countries have continued to ban same sex marriage while others have legalised it. Despite pressure from international community and particularly the United States on the legalisation of same sex marriage, the United Nations has also called for it based on human rights stance however the UN lacks the moral and political power to enforce this legislation in these foreign, independent and sovereign states. This paper uses two models of policy change – the Multiple Stream Model and Punctuated Equilibrium to discuss the approaches to policy changes in same sex marriage across diverse political terrain.

The Changing Legislation on Homosexuality

Legal innovation in many cases is inspired by the changes in people’s attitude. The major legal and social change towards homosexuality in Europe began in the early 90’s and this wave took different dimensions and forms in each of the European countries. Some countries like Germany, France and Norway allowed the formal registration of the homosexual unions while countries like Spain, the Netherlands, Sweden and Belgium allowed same sex marriage. In many of these cases, the rights that were applicable to heterosexual partners were also available to homosexuals but in varying degrees even in countries where gay marriage was out rightly legalised.

Anderson stated that one of the events that had led to acceptance of gay marriages is the problems that confront todays marriages where the essence of heterosexual marriages seems to have been defeated and people are largely considering homosexuality (Andersson 2006). The author noted that if prior marriages had been confronted with serious troubles and if previous heterosexual marriages had effectively served the purpose of the marriage institution, there would not have been any consideration for homosexuality. Calvo calls on the recognition of people’s rights and the prevailing models of citizenship by formulators of public policies while democracies must also be ready and tolerant to accepting expensive conditions of citizenship such as the same sex marriage and not impose a moral restraint on people’s behaviour or disregard conditions that determines their humanity but making laws that denigrate their personalities since diversity is an integral part of human configuration.

In 1996, sexual orientation was included in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the country took a bold step in 2005 by granting gay partners the right to marry in 2005. Since this right was granted, the perception of Canadian people towards same sex marriage has since changed dramatically and there is less condemnation compared with the past prior to such legislation. It was the attitude of the Spaniards towards same sex marriage that also led to the legalisation of same sex in the country in 2005 since a survey of the country showed that people had becoming increasingly tolerant of the homosexual act than before.

Requena however holds that in all society, there is a marked difference in the acceptance of same sex marriage between the older and younger population while there is also a countrywide difference among nations of the world. The percentage of those who approve of same sex marriage in Canada is smaller compared to the percentage in the United States and other countries. Within Canada for instance, people in Quebec are seen to be more tolerant than those in other parts of the country and this explains how conservative other parts of the country are when brought in comparison.

Based on the Punctuated Equilibrium model, it is stated that political processes are characterized by incrementalism and stability but in some cases, there could be a fundamental change which becomes quite different from what was obtainable in the past. It posits that in many cases, policies undergo stasis instead of crisis this largely explains the policy change in same sex marriage as this is largely a deviation from the age-long tradition of heterosexual relationship. Baumgartner and Jones once noted that policy making undergoes a period of stasis in which policies recede and also emerge and that the institution tends to create a punctuated equilibria and that some people have special interest in policies thereby causing policy monopolies. It is also stated that as a result of overlapping jurisdiction and separated institutions across the world, there could by dynamism in policy change in marriage.

However, the basic fundamental assumption of the Multiple Stream Model (MSM) is that policy making across the world is a dynamic process and cannot be predicted and there is an ambiguity in the environment which also makes it complex. It is stated that there are three streams which affects policies which are the politics stream, policy stream and the problem stream. These three streams have different effects on the formulation or repeal of policies. The politics stream centres on the opinion of the public in the state as regards a public policy while the policy stream deals with the policy formulation and the problem stream deals with the issue which captures the attention of everyone in the state including the government. It can be realised that in many of these state where same sex marriage have been legalised, it has become an issue which captured the attention of people and the government and there was a necessity to make a policy that favours public opinion on the issue.

The problem with the Multiple Stream Model is that sometimes, policies are made without necessarily considering public opinion in some states and the fact remains that the theory did not consider the role of the media which in many cases may not present the reality but have considerable effect on public opinion and government policy as there are people who are policy entrepreneur and could change public opinion for personal benefits.

Same Sex Marriage and International Democratic Norms

Human rights groups have stated that there is a correlation between the level of freeness of a society as a result of its democratic leanings and it acceptance of gay marriage. It is established that societies that are highly democratic tend to accept homosexuality more than societies that are less democratic. Countries where there are restrictions on individual rights, speech and movement tend to be more strict on gay marriage. According to Javier Corrales who is currently serves as a professor at Amherst College, he noted that the strength of democracy of a state largely determines the acceptance and legislation of same sex marriage. One of the forces that it is largely improving the changes in laws against same sex marriage is the antidiscrimination laws that abound in most democracies which also have laws which protect sodomy and employment discrimination of people based on sexual orientation.

However, there is seemingly a gradual building of consensus on gay rights as the Human Rights Council of the United Nations has for the first time in 2011 passed a resolution on the rising concern for over the high level of discrimination and violence visited on members of the gay movement based on their sexual orientation preference. States are now being morally pressured into accepting the reality of same sex marriage. Same sex marriage became legal in the United States as a result of the Supreme Court legislation of June 26, 2015 in the country and this shifted the public opinion in favour of same sex marriage as over 65% of Americans approved of same sex marriage in 2017 compared with the 35% who approved of it in 2011.

The international organisation which advances the rights and privileges of gay people all over the world, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) attended a Ministerial Meeting of the United Nations on September 26, 2013 where the representatives of the organisation discussed the various forms of discriminations against gay people and in which the representatives of the counties available in that meeting declared that they will implement policies that will safeguard people from discrimination based on their sexual orientation. The resolution made at that meeting considered Lesbians Gay Bisexual and Transgender rights as an integral part of human rights.

Global Review of Same Sex Marriage Policies

Among the nations of the world, there are diverse policies which regulate sexual activities and marriages and these policies range from harsh to subtle laws. In some states, same sex marriage is allowed while in others death sentence or jail term or imprisonment is pronounced on those found to be engaged in the act of same sex marriage.

It was stated by the former secretary general of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon that states should repeal laws that criminalize same sex marriage or any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation or the sexual identity of people. In another development, 85 countries who are members of the UN made a joint statement at the human rights council of the organization calling for an end to violence against people as a result of their gender preference of sexual orientation. There is an impressive development in same sex marriage laws the world over as 32 countries already recognize same sex couples and also consider them domestic partnership .

Conclusion

This paper posits that states are now changing their laws and national policies to admit the new realities that same sex marriage is another type of marriage which prior to this time was considered an aberration and unlawful act. This is a proof that in the past century, the institution of marriage and the family generally has undergone remarkable changes and states have realised that same sex marriage has become an integral part of human rights law. It was not until 1989 that same sex marriage was recognised for the first time in Denmark and this has ten place in the Netherlands, the United States, the UK, South Africa and some developing countries. Same sex marriage may have serious economic and political as well as social consequences but the truth remains that there is a policy change globally which favours same sex marriage.

There is no doubt that today, gay marriages tend to get lost in abstraction. It is one of the most commonly debated subjects among many culture of Americans. Those in favor of legalizing gay marriage believe it is unconstitutional to deny rights of Americans. Although there are some people who advocate for gay marriages, permitting gays to marry will cause controversy to the traditional views of marriage. In recent polls, statistics show that Americans are now shifting their views of gay marriages and slowly accepting them into their society. In results as more supports of gay marriage grow the contemporary issue would then inevitably stir up controversial interest. Many believe that marriage cannot be generated by any legislators or political leaders. Instead, it is the individuals choice on who they should marry. Gay marriages harms today society by misleading children, changing the concept of traditional marriage and leading us down a “slippery slope”.

Television (TV) shows are now adapting to the ever-changing family structure in the United States (US). Recently network stations like Nickelodeon, Disney, and PBS kids are airing shows that display gay couples. In my opinion, TV shows should be aimed at sports, education, and social skills. Sexuality should not be shown on kid TV shoes. Showing a homosexual relationship on TV shows will likely lead to a conversation that some parents may not find age-appropriate. At some point, usually around d the age of puberty, parents will have the talk about sex and maybe sexuality. Displaying gay marriages on tv too early may cause parents to talk about sex and sexuality before puberty younger kids may bring the conversation a little sooner than expected. Gay marriages should not be displayed on TV for children. It can be misleading for children who are not of age to explore sexuality]. Imagine a five-year-old asking their parents How to do two men create a baby? This question should not be in the thoughts of a five-year-old. A question was asked on Debate.org, asking would it be inappropriate for television shows aimed at kids to show an openly gay character. Forty-five percent said yes. If this showing of gay marriages continues this may cause children to be confused about gender roles and expectations.

Another impact is that gay marriages would further weaken traditional family values essentials. Andreas J. Köstenberger author of the Bible teaching on Marriage and Family quotes “The Bible defines family in a narrow sense as the union on one man and one woman in matrimony which is normally blessed with one or several natural or adopted children.” This informs society that the aspects of marriage are complementary to males and females. The male and female role is designed to procreate. Homosexuals fall short when it comes to the area of procreation. They are not able to fulfill God’s creation mandated for humanity to be fruitful and multiply. The homosexual community is not by God. If God wanted the world to have same-sex marriage, it would be made possible for them to procreate. Homosexuals would argue that the bible does not forbid homosexual relationships, but the Bible does state God’s unreasoning about homosexually take 1 Timothy 1:10 “For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other things that are contrary to sound doctrine. The bible prohibition refers to homosexuality at large, not solely to unnatural forms of it.

Gay marriages could also lead society down a “slippery slope”, giving people in polygamous, incestuous bestial and other non-traditional relationships the right to marry. Can you imagine a day where it would be legal for daughter and father to marry? Or even a man being able to have multiple spouses. Glen Lavy, J.D senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, argued Los Angles Times “The movement for polygamy and polyamory is pose to use the successes of same-sex couples as a springboard for further deinstitutionalizing marriage. A federal district court in Utah rejected the claim of polygamists that the legalization of same-sex marriage compels the legalization of plural marriage also. The polygamous plaintiffs (Kody Brown and his four “wives,” stars of a reality television show “Sister Wives”) appealed but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit rejected their claims for lack of standing because they had failed to show that they faced a “credible threat of prosecution.” Kody then took the case to the Supreme Court of the United States which also declined to consider an appeal by Mr. Brown and his wives. In Brown v. Buhman, the appellants sought to have the high court hear their challenge to a Utah law that not only prohibits polygamous marriage, but which also bans cohabitation by married persons with others to whom they are not married. The Court refused to consider their claims. Even though the Supreme Court denied Brown’s request if Americans continue to move away from the traditional ways of marriage one day it will be hard to reject the claims for polygamy.

The full insertion of same-sex marriages is one sense of a large change. What the constitution indicates, is that whatever the state decides to do in this area will be done on a basis of equality. Although this is certain it will not change the beliefs of the negative impacts of it being misleading to children, changing the concept of traditional marriage, and leading us down a “slippery slope”.

Introduction

Marriage is an important provision of Islam. Along with the creation of men, Almighty Allah has given some demands for all men and some methods for satisfying those demands. One of the important demands amongst all of them is marriage. Marriage is a special blessing of God to men and the important circumcision of the Prophet (PBUH). Marriage is a unique tool to prevent the depravity of human character. Marriage makes a starting of an Ideal family structure.

Marriage is the main source to meet human biological needs and human satisfaction. Marriage is an important ingredient of Islamic Shariah. In the Holy Qur’an, Allah says about marriage, “One of the sign of Allah is that He created from among you your mates so that you may find peace with them and He has created mutual love and kindness among you.” (Surah Room, Verse: 21)

What is marriage?

It is a religious and social permission to stay together of one male with one female so that they can share their physical and mental demand. Marriage; the oldest institution of human society; over time, the organization only has changed from its original form to its present structure. The interesting thing is that marriage has been institutionalized mainly by religion. All the rules of marriage are regulated in the religious discipline.

From ancient times, in many countries of the world, the provision of religious scriptures was the rule of many social systems (like marriage). Apart from religious and state laws, folk culture has also influenced marital life in many ways. Marriage begins with a new family. In addition, marriage creates opportunities for family and inheritance. Through marriage, men are identified as husbands and females as wives (spouses). The married life of husband and wife is called “bridal life.”

There are diverse traditions of marriage in every religion. In the same way, marriage is held in different ways in different societies. Although marriage is primarily a religious practice, it is also a legal practice in modern civilization. As unmarried sex is recognized as illegal and is considered a sin and a crime. By marriage procedure, it is turned into an excellent legal practice.

Muslim marriage

Marriage is what men and women are supposed to do to benefit from each other. It is a mutual agreement to build an ideal family and safe society. “Marry those of you are unmarried, and those of your slaves and women who do good deeds. If they are helpless, Allah will ease them by His grace. God is all-knowing. Those who are not capable of marriage should exercise restraint until Allah destroys them by His grace”.-Surah An-nur: 32-33)

In Islam, the bride can say yes or no to the marriage according to her wishes. A formal and firm marital agreement is considered a marriage in Islam, which sets the boundary between the bridegroom and the bride. The wedding must include two Muslim witnesses. Marriage in Islam is the norm of a Sunnah or Muhammad (PBUH). Islam is strongly advised to get married.

What should we do before we get married as a Muslim?

There is a need for some mental preparation for starting your family life. You suddenly see his/her, fall in love at first sight, and marry in a while – all these are very wrong thoughts and actions that can lead to an unhealthy married life for both of you.

So, the question is what you should do or what you should know before you get married?

Answer the below questions by yourselves-

1. How do you know you’re ready to get married? And more precisely, how do you make sure that you are prepared to marry only the specific people you choose? It is important to know for yourself whether you are ready for marriage or not. This is why some personal calculations have to be settled to know the good aspects of yourself and identify your weaknesses. You need to know how God is related to you, and how do you expect God to be with your partner.
2. Are you ready to take the responsibility of building your family, compressing on a variety of issues, working together with your partner, meeting your personal and family goals?

It is important to know how much you will contribute to the family after marriage and what you can do to build a healthy, happy, and comfortable family.

So, carefully think all these issues and know the exact relevant explanations from your heart.

Muslim marriage rules

All the relevant rules and regulations to successfully complete a Muslim marriage are discussed below:

Holding a marriage

1. The (would be) husband and wife should be free from all obstacles when thinking of marriage.
2. Ezab is a proposal to bring the marriage proposal to the bride’s guardian or her representative. For example, ‘I want to marry your daughter” or propose in some other way.
3. Confession; it is the consent sentence of the groom or his representative. For example, ‘I accept, or I agreed.’
4. Two righteous witnesses. The witnesses must be men. One man and two women, or four women, will not run. Because the Prophet (PBUH) said,

“The marriage will not be organized without a guardian and two witnesses.”

Condition for purification of marriage

• The groom and the bride should be accepted by each other.
• The bride and groom should be pleased with each other. The Prophet (PBUH) said, “women without a husband (widows or divorced) cannot be married without her decision (that is; clearly she should decide from her).” A virgin girl cannot be married without her consent (either through words or through silence)”

People asked, “O Allah’s Messenger (Swt)!” How do I know his consent? He said, “It is his consent to remain silent (because of shame).” (Bukhari, Hadith No. 1).

• The guardian of the daughter must fulfill the duty of the marriage contract. Allah has directed the guardians to be accomplished the marry off their son and daughter. Allah says, “And you shall marry unmarried men and women among you.” (Surah Noor, 20:12)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “A woman who marries without the permission of her parents can cancel her marriage, cancel her marriage, cancel her marriage.”

• The witness should be kept during the marriage season. The Prophet (PBUH) said, “There is no marriage except guardian and two witnesses” (SahihJame, Hadith no. 1).

The witness must be two male (independent) witnesses or one male (independent) and two female witnesses who hear both the proposition and the confessional statement. (Ad-Durrul Mukhtar-1/9; Fatwaay Hindia-9/26)

It is also important to confirm the marriage campaign. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “You declare marriage.” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith No. 12)

Condition for being the bride’s guardian

1. Having a sound brain.
2. Being an adult.
3. Freedom from the chains of slavery.
4. To be ritualistic of the bride. Therefore, no non-Muslim person can be the guardian of a Muslim man or woman.
5. To be upright, that is, not to Faske. Some scholars have imposed this condition. Others have called the external (piety) or Godliness is sufficient. According to some, the welfare of the person to whom he is marrying will still have the merits to consider.
6. Being a man. Dear Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “A woman cannot marry another woman. Or the woman cannot marry herself. The adulteress herself marries herself.’
7. In the marriage, the bridegroom or the bride should be able to consider the ‘kufu’ or aspects of equality and other welfare.

Fiqh scholars have prescribed the clause of the guardians. Therefore, it is not acceptable to have a close guardian parent while having a tight guard. If there is no parent nearby, then a parent will be accepted.

Maher in Muslim marriage

It is the duty of the husband to pay the Maher to her wife during the marriage. In this regard, Allah Almighty says, “Pay your wife Maher with happiness.” – Surah An-Nisa 🙁 4) It is the right of each wife to get the Maher. Allah Almighty has given this right to women to claim and collect her Maher from her husband. So, like all other rights, claiming Maher to a husband is not contagious to his wife.

Many people think that the money of the Maher is to be paid to the wife, only if the marriage breaks down. This is ignorance and extreme misconception. It is obligatory to pay the Maher, even if the marriage is not divorced. If the wife does not get the full or part of the Maher, it will be a loan to the husband. Until repayment, the husband will be in debt, and the wife will be the creditor. In this case, if the husband dies, the wife’s Maher must be paid before sharing the husband’s wealth with his heirs.

And if the wife dies earlier, the husband will have to divide the wife’s Maher between her heirs. Therefore, with the same importance as other loans, the debt should pay as quickly as possible. It is not acceptable in the Shariah to seek forgiveness from the wife on the night of the wedding, at the time of death of the wife, at the time of even husband’s death. In any circumstances, each husband is obliged to give the Maher to his wife even if he apologizes.

As evidenced by verse 24 of Surah Nisa, the Maher must be a marketable material asset. And the Hadith proves that the minimum amount of seals will be ten Dirhams. In modern measure, it is about 30.618 grams of silver. The maximum amount of Maher was not determined. Any amount above the minimum amount can be set as a Maher.

However, since the husband is obliged to pay the debt, it should be taken into consideration as to his ability to pay. No such decision should be imposed on him – that he might be guilty.

Islamic marriage Requirements

Islam, the religion of humanity, has arranged for men and women to be bound to marriages in order to live a beautiful life. Islam has emphasized the need to involve in marriage to protect humans from the curse of the lawlessness and ungodliness of a volatile, voluntary life. It is the system of a viable and practical tool to protect the purity and integrity of men and women. Marriage is the establishment of a relationship between men and women in the social environment and in accordance with Islamic Shariah. Marriage makes it perfectly legal for both men and women to live together and to have sexual relations with each other.

A person, who is capable of getting married, has been ordered to be bound in marriage. Don’t want to get married, although his/her ability is a heinous crime in Islam. Marriage is not just for the enjoyment of pleasure, but also indirectly or directly, it helps to make every man’s and woman’s life pure, beautiful, and meaningful.

In the Holy Qur’an, the marriage and the adoption of a wife are mentioned as a special gift from Allah to the Prophet. In this regard, Surah Riyadh of the Holy Qur’an mentions: “O Prophet, before you, I sent many prophets and provided for them wives and children.” This verse indicates that marriage is a divine provision given by God to us.

In this regard, Allah says in verse 187 of Surah al-Baqara of the Holy Qur’an: “Wives are a garment for you, and you are a garment for them.” That is, just as clothing protects the human body from all kinds of nudity, obscenity, ugliness, etc. Like this, husband and wife also protect each other through marriage. In the same context, it is said in Miskat Sharif that “one who marries, half his faith is fulfilled; he should fear God for the other half.” The Hadith further mentions that “when the husband and wife sit alone, talk and laugh, their reward is like Nafal worship.” Moreover, in the Hadith, it says that wives are the best assets of the world’s temporary wealth. The importance and necessity of marriage are very important in every man’s life.

Sahabi Hazrat Abbas (peace be upon him) said, “There is no rule in Islam regarding virginity and singleness.” Marriage is a natural manifestation of a tendency to be inherent in human nature. Our Prophet (peace be upon him) mentioned in one Hadith about the consequence of not marrying despite his ability-“A person who does not get married despite being able to marry does not join my community.”

In Musnad Ahmad, it is further stated that-“the Prophet (PBUH) would order us to marry and strictly forbid him to live unmarried.” Moreover, referring to the dire consequences of not marrying despite being able to do so, the world Prophet (peace be upon him) sharply said (described by Hazrat Ayesha (peace be upon her) that-

The Prophet (PBUH) said that-“marrying is my ideal and lasting principle, whoever will not follow this Sunnah, will not belong to my community.”

Muslim 4 marriage rule

According to Islamic marriage laws, men of Sunni and Shia tribes can marry many. This will allow men to have multiple wives with a maximum of four at the same time. However, the same woman cannot have multiple husbands in reverse order.

These polygamous practices are different in different parts of the Muslim world. This is very common in some Muslim countries, and in some countries such as Azerbaijan, Tunisia, and Turkey, Islamic law is not accepted for marriage. As a result, polygamy is not legal there.

The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, “He who has two wives, but one of them who leans towards one, will appear half-dead on the Day of Resurrection.”- (Ahmed 2/347; will come to Sunan; Hakim (2/186) Ibn Hibban (419)

It is said that Islam legalized many marriages. In fact, Islam has set a limit for many marriages, that no one can marry more than four. Because in that era, even one hundred or two hundred years ago from today, in many countries, many people used to marry 50/60/80 even more!

If you do not believe, you can read both the ‘Many Marriage’ and ‘Child Marriage’ of Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar. If you read the history of the Roman Empire, the Greek Empire, or any of the earth’s history, you will find that in that era, men had many wives. For this, Davenport states that “Muhammad (SAW) was bound to limit many marriages.”

So, Islam has legalized four marriages but gently advised one to marry.

Verdict

Biological needs are also crucial for human life like other needs, such as food, clothing, housing, education, and treatment. In order to meet this demand, Islam has provided for marriage. Marriage is another name for the social validity of having a matured man and a woman together. In many religions, the rules of marriage are the same, but in Islam, it is wide-spread and useful for both men and women.

“You marry them with the permission of their guardians, giving them proper Maher, so that they may be protected in the fortress of marriage and not engage in free sex and secret friendship.”-(Surah An-Nisa, 25)

Regarding marriage, our beloved Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) has said, “Everything in the world is (temporary) wealth, but holy women are the best asset of all wealth.” (Muslim)

The LGBT people group stays as one of the nation’s minority segments today. Lesbian, gay, cross-sexual and transgender individuals frequently face disservices in landing employed for positions, getting rights for common marriage, and even in firing up close to home organizations. Most non-heteros additionally have a higher pace of suicide and suicide admiration contrasted with non-gay people. According to an international research, 10% of the world’s population are theoretically part of the LGBT community, out or not, including 12 million Filipinos who may experience discrimination based on who they are. This has led to the rise of the cause for LGBT rights, defined as the right to equality and non-discrimination. As a member of the United Nations, the Philippines is signatory to various international covenants promoting human rights.

The goal of most people in life is to be happy. There are two major fronts to their happiness, their jobs and their love lives. While education may be the key to securing that perfect job, there is no formula for finding the perfect mate, especially for gays. Furthermore, once gays find their partners for life, the law does not recognize their marriage, denying homosexual spouses the benefits that heterosexual spouses have enjoyed for centuries.

The whole same sex marriage has been a debacle ever since the LGBT had made its mark in society’s record. The question of whether or not same sex marriage should be approved has been rejected by the Catholic. Why? Because of our deeply rooted faith. But what if it includes as philosophical explanation that every member of LGBT community is not thinking about a consequence weather whatever action they do. It can be ethical or unethical thing. In utilitarianism they do not consider whether the action is bad or wrong because is what more useful, while in Hegelianism we are all equal one.

I am pro same sex marriage. Maybe the person we call ‘God’ is real or maybe he is not but one thing is sure, religion is just an institution; a label. In the bible ‘God’ never stated to hate the different. He never stated to stone the weak. ‘God’ never not disapproved of loving someone of the same gender. He never stated he would condemn them to ‘Hell’ for their sexual preferences. The Catholics believe in going to church will suffice for saving our soul from damnation, but it is never -nor will it ever- be enough to save us. You go to church every single day and beg for the sins you have committed yet at the end of the day you are still that same person you begged forgiveness for. Now tell me, what is the point? Is there any consequence? Does it real? Through the whole point of these writings, what im trying to formulate is for us what to believe in, good or bad.

We advertise change. We promulgate change and how change is good. But do we ever change? Are we a different person when we walk out those doors every sing day? Sometimes we wish we were, but most of the times we are not. Everybody wants change, but nobody wants to change. Some people argues same sex marriage is not a sin. Loving someone was never a sin. But when it comes to religion it is a sin. But that’s what it is, having different belief systems is not wrong. Our faith does not depend on how well we know the bible, but how we live our days in the light with God. Society needs to learn the difference between being a person that goes through life according to the bible and some idealist or realist person that lives according to God or its Monism.