What is less true: there is a significant number of countries in Africa and Asia in which non-violent homosexual intercourse is perceived as a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment or death, for instance, in modern Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria, and Mauritania.
In these countries, there is no open struggle for the rights of sexual and gender minorities since such activities may pose a threat to their freedom and life. However, some political parties lobby for the softening of criminal legislation against homosexuals. The lobbyists are the reformist and moderately liberal forces in the leadership of these states. In particular, former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami expressed his views in favor of softening the laws on sexual orientation.
In addition, international pressure is aimed to compel respect for human rights.
Abolition of instructions and provisions defining marriage as a marriage
The idea of rights equality implies the official recognition of marriage as one of the forms of legalized intimate contact between spouses determined on the basis of mutual trust and mutual responsibility.
In this regard, the phenomenon of marriage is often called “cultural traditions” in a variety of names:
The choice of partner in the framework of marriage is no longer left to the individual. The importance of personal choice is generally recognized. In traditional Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, marriage is considered a heterosexual institution.
However, today, some denominations of Protestant Christianity and Judaism called for civil recognition of same-sex marriages, and their clergy conducts marriage rites of gay and lesbian couples. Some countries with deep historical traditions of Catholicism have also changed their traditions. Creating the gay marriage persuasive essay outline you should state that Spain legalized same-sex marriages in 2005, and Slovenia in 2006. Same-sex marriages were legalized in some parts of historically Catholic Latin America. For example, since 2003 residents of Buenos Aires, the capital of Argentina, can form same-sex civilian unions. Residents of Mexico City, the capital of Mexico, can do this since 2007. Changes in the marriage law took place in such a predominantly Muslim country as Albania. In July 2009, Prime Minister Sali Berisha invited the parliament to consider such a measure as providing same-sex couples equal rights with heterosexuals, the legalization of same-sex marriages.
The creation of a family remains an area of particular concern to people, of those opposed to same-sex marriages. Opponents of same-sex marriage in their argumentative essays against gay marriage argue that the tradition of heterosexual marriage has always been based on the need for the offspring. “Children need both mothers and fathers,” says Robert H. Knight, who participated in the development of the draft federal law on the protection of marriage in the United States, “and marriage is a means by which the society receives them. Supporters of same-sex marriages retort this argument.” But the fact that the institution of marriage is inherently unequal, does not follow from the application of the tradition of marriage. The choice of partner in the traditional family remains with the husband, because he is the “father of the family.” The political makeup of the family in the modern United States is dominated by the hierarchy of family values:
There are several main types of relations functioning in the social institution of marriage: patriarchal or traditional; focused on children or modern; marital or postmodern. Today, a family is a “marriage of good friends” united for the joint organization of life and raising of children.
According to sociologists, there are several different types of relations functioning in parallel in society: patriarchal or traditional; focused on children or modern; marital or postmodern. Today’s family is a “marriage of good friends” united for the joint organization of life and raising of children.
For many centuries, the absolute parental power and authoritarian system of upbringing reigned in the patriarchal family. The slightest violation of these principles led to inevitable sanctions. Children were subjected to corporal punishment if they rudely talked with their parents or refused to fulfill their orders. In general, care for children was not in the customs of the ancient peasants. According to the opinion of ethnographers, there was no concept of responsibility of parents towards kids.
At the same time, along with the irresponsibility of adults, there were excessive demands on kids. Hence the special respect of the peasants to the fifth commandment: “Honour thy father and thy mother”. So, you may note the positive changes between past and present in a “relationship between parents and children” essay.
There were compulsory collectivism and centralism in the patriarchal family. Common interests did not just dominate. They were an absolute value. Interests of individuals were not taken into account.