c




The paper is a debate on the issue of same p
 . It refers to arguments for same p
 ,
as well as contentions against it within society. The paper discusses constitutional amendments, as well
as religious beliefs related to the issue. The paper concludes with the contention that it will be many
generations before same p
 can be considered a normal element of society.

À    
"The concept of same sex marriage first became popular in the 1970s as gay and lesbian couples began
to consider permanent unions reflecting traditional marriages between men and women. This concept
grew to national importance in the 1990s as opposing factions within the political framework of the
country began to voice their adamant disregard for same sex couples that, in their opinion, were
disrespecting the traditional institution of marriage in the United States. To date, seven states have
provided benefits for same sex couples that have participated in civil unions, (Vermont, New Jersey,
Connecticut, California, Maine, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, and New Jersey). However, only
Massachusetts has performed binding traditional marriage ceremonies between same sex couples. With
the passage of time the proponents on both sides of the issue have directed reference of the issue to
the constitution, religion, and tradition in America."

No2.



This paper analyzes the policy in the constitution of Canada regarding same p
 p. The paper
argues that same p
 p are constitutional because they follow the spirit of the charter of rights
and freedoms. This means that everyone's rights are being respected and to make them illegal would be
to trample human rights.

À    
"Same Sex Marriage in Canada is it Constitutional? Same-sex marriage has become one of the most
controversial issues in Canada. Gay and lesbian couples are obviously very fond of the idea and believe it
is a natural extension of their human rights(Alderson 107). Many religious leaders and conservatives
believe that same-sex marriage is a fundamental attack on their faiths and or value systems (Todd A.5).
Essentially the argument is based on determining which group's human rights will be least damaged by
any particular decision. With these arguments in mind the next question that should be asked is what
type of policy could be used to make same-sex marriage legal and constitutional?"

No3.



This paper deals with the same p
 issue and analyzes the problems with it. The paper
discusses how there is a general move toward the acceptance of gay  p. It then states reasons
why these  p should not be legitimized or practiced. It is the aim of this opinionated paper to
give the reader sound knowledge of the reasons to oppose same p
 p.

Table of Contents:
Abstract
Introduction
Same 

References

À    
"A family's primary focus is on the nurturing and development of children. Same sex marriages are
denying the children their right to have a father and a mother. Changing the definition of marriage and
including same sex marriage same can have far-reaching changes that can influence the development of
children. By changing the definition of marriage and including same sex marriage in that, one is changing
the family dynamics and societal structures as well. Firstly same sex couples cannot have any children
together as it is biologically impossible. What females can do is that they can either opt to adopt a child
or go for test tube babies. If they do undergo in-vitro fertilization, they must use the sperms of the male.
What more obvious a hint can nature give them that same sex marriage is not a part or plan of nature.
The males in a same sex marriage have no option but to adopt a child. During the upbringing and
nurturing of a child, both maternal and paternal care is required. He needs the love of a father as much
as the love of a mother and there is no way that an adopted child can be given the love of a father as
well as a mother. Only the love of two fathers can be given or two mothers and the love of two fathers
or two mothers do not equal the love of a mother and a father."

No.4



This essay focuses on the debate on same-p
 and the various components of the argument
including its religious, ethical and political implications. The essay outlines the constitutional and
religious arguments, and then outlines the ethical and political arguments. Overall, the essay finds that
same-p
 is not a personal matter, but rather a communal matter. Further, the essay argues
that a relationship that is politically indecisive and socially unacceptable cannot last and that same-p

 threatens the current institution of  .

À    
"To attain the constitutional support for gays within the United States, there are three approaches that
many of the advocates of the same-sex marriage have taken. These three approaches are: 1) Equality in
security which simply means that the gays should have the same privacy policies as any other citizen and
should have the same rights and protections under the law; 2) Sexual Discrimination which simply
signifies any form of unjust behavior towards an individual based upon their sexual orientation or
preferences. This includes any laws and/or activities that discriminate against the gays and lesbians or
don't give them equal opportunities; and 3) Basic Human Rights which simply means that the gays and
lesbians should be give the same rights and opportunities like any other US citizen without stopping
them from enjoying the rights of marriage, property or occupation."

No.5: >1600 words

è
  


   
 
      
         
     

    
 

    
     

  
    
  !      

 
 
  "        
 
           #   $%  
 
  &    
       

  

     '
 

  

 
 "        
     " 
 
 
 ( $& " 
  
  
 

 & " 
    

 " !
' )   
*  è
 + "  
     è  
  
 "     
     ,  " 
 

     
    
    


   " 
    " 




  


  
  "   
  
 -
    )   .   
  
  " 
    
 "  


è,  /012344435 
    "    
   
 , 
  
   "    
      

 
   " 
 
 
 
    "    
 " 
      
!
   
 
   
    

 (     

  
     6     
 
       
  6
   
        
 !       

 
 
   "  

 

    
     "    " 

 7   

   "     
   
 

      
  "  
    
      

    


 
 
  !
  
  
 
   
  
   
        
     

     "     !

  "   
  
 
 
     
    

              
 


 
  

 "        /- 
32344435
    8  
  
 ' , ) 

 
     6       



 8   !) 
)
"  .  ,
       
      /
012344495'  è )
6   
       
    
       
        /+
92344495! 

          
     

      
 
     !    
   
         
 
         
 
     
    
 :     
 $  
 
 
         
  
 " 
   

   
  $! 
8  
  
 
    
  

 
      
 
  (   
 : "
/  12344435&        
           : "
    (
  
 
!  
      
&  
 9;;<&  , 
    
  
    :
"
       , 
   /è  =2;>359;;?


 &     

    

  
   /'32;>95        

          
  
   


        
      
 : "      9;;=@  )    
  

  
 
   /'32;>15!
        
   
  
    ) 
 
9;;;). 

.
* 
        
     
 
  
"         
 
      /- 
32344495!
 , 
   
 
         
 
  
 
 
   
 
 
   
    !    
        
)    
3444)           

(
       /! 12344495
0  @  33    
 =9:1;
       
  8)       
   ! 
    
 : " )  

 : "
     
 
  
    !@  
33 8  
6 7 @:33   
,   

6

 

     
  

A  
   
       
 (  /012144415  
 
  
  :  !    

 
  

          


  
   
    
  B 
  
    
            
    

  '  
      :
:      

7         "
  
 



    
  

 C '    


  è
  ' 

      
 
           
   "  "

   (   6          
  
   
  " 
  
 

"! 

  
          " 
    

            $! 
 

  
              :

  
 

   
 

       , 
 
8   8     "    
   
 
 6  !  



 
     
   

&  
 
 & " 

   
 

 
  
 
       

 
   
    
 -   
 
   
 
    , 

 
    
  
   
               

 
   

  6       
"
   

 
        
 

 
 

  -C  0

  
   


  
  
 
 
    
è  
  &
è      
 $
0 
 
     
   
 
 D  


  
  
  
  
,     
 
!    

  
     
  
  6

        
       
             
 
@ C  

   
  
             
 
  
       


No6.



This paper examines the proposal for legalization of same-p
 , and how it is one of the most
significant issues in contemporary American family law. The author discusses the potential
consequences of legalizing same-p
 , both positive and negative, for children, parents, same-
p
couples, families, and the social structure. Litigation and current laws regarding this issue are
discussed. Arguments are made for the legalization of same-p
 .

À    
"Marriage has changed greatly throughout the years. In Western law, wives are now equal rather than
subordinate partners; interracial marriage is now widely accepted, both in statute and in society; and
marital failure itself, rather than the fault of one partner, may be grounds for a divorce. Social change
has been felt in marriages in recent years as divorce rates have increased and have been integrated into
upper class families. Proposals to legalize same-sex marriage or to enact broad domestic partnership
laws are currently being promoted by gay and lesbian activists, especially in Europe and North America."

No7.



This paper discusses the argument for and against legalizing same-p
 p in the United States. It
compares the situation in the US with that in Canada with regard to government policy on same-p

 p. The paper argues that same-p
 should be legalized in the whole of the US. Its
primary argument is that failure to do so would be contrary to many of the most fundamental rights of
many American citizens and will also serve to perpetuate prejudice against same-p
couples.

À    
"Perhaps the most important argument in favour of legalizing same-sex marriage is the simple fact that
by not doing so, we harm innocent children. This is because many same-sex couples have children. The
2000 US Census revealed that nationwide some 34% of female same-sex households, and some 22% of
male same-sex households, have children. These rates do not lag far behind the national rate for
married opposite-sex couples, which is 45.6%, or the national rate for unmarried opposite-sex couples,
which is 43.1 percent. From this, we can deduce that there are at least 400,000 children who are
currently being raised by same-sex couples nationwide - and this number continues to grow rapidly.
(Weiser) These children may come from previous heterosexual relationships, or from adoption, or same-
sex couples may choose to have children through one route or another. The point is that these are
innocent children who must not be punished for the sexual orientation of their parents, or because of
society's prejudices against same-sex couples. These children deserve to have the legal and emotional
security of having parents who are married to one another, just as much as the children of heterosexual
couples deserve this. Therefore, same-sex marriage should be legalized to protect these children."