The Society Should Shun Homosexuals – Argumentative Essay

The term homosexuality’s root is a Greek term that means the same or similar. As well, it is thought to have originated from the term sexus, a Latin word, which means romantic or sexual attraction or conduct between same-gender members. Homosexuality, which is one of the commonest sexual orientations, is a persisting pattern or trend of sexual, romantic, or emotional attractions between males or between females (Aldrich, 2015). Besides, the term is commonly utilized when one is referring to an individual’s sense, or feeling, of identity in the light of such attractions, the connected behaviors as well as membership to gay communities according to Cele (2015) as well as Santos (2015). It is an actuality that homosexuality is in existence and every society ought to address it. Sullivan (2011) in “What Is a Homosexual? according to Schmidt, Shelley and Bardes (2014). The acceptance of homosexual orientations by the society is now rather low in African and Asian nations. The acceptance of homosexual orientations by the society is rather high among Americans, Australians, and Europeans. Over time, the West has increasingly accepted homosexuality (Bradshaw, Heaton, Decoo, Dehlin, Galliher & Crowell, 2015). This essay contends that the society should not embrace homosexuals. Rather, the society should shun homosexuals.

Read also Sexual Objectification of Females Ought To Be Denounced Powerfully – Argumentative Essay

according to Schmidt, Shelley and Bardes (2014).The related thinking is that several genes, possibly interacting with specific environmental realities and influences, explain variations in given sexual orientations. Those in support of the position that the society ought to welcome all sexual orientations, including homosexuality, hold that genes markedly determine one’s sexual leanings (Aldrich, 2015). Notably, the argument that homosexuality is a consequence of particular genes almost always breeds explosive debates. There is a high chance that the debates are fueled by the political, as well as social, ramifications of homosexuality, which affect the core foundations of every nation. There have been fears that those advocating for the embracing of homosexuality by the society many not be communicating the truth regarding homosexuality (Bradshaw, Heaton, Decoo, Dehlin, Galliher & Crowell, 2015). There have been widespread fears that there may not be a genetic foundation for the homosexual orientation after all. Notably, to date, there is yet not scientific evidence demonstrating that there is a rather substantial, significant genetic element to homosexuality. There is a wide-ranging religious view that if God meant heterosexuality and homosexuality accepted by the society, He would have incorporated genes that would have made some persons heterosexual and others homosexual in their body makeup according to Cele (2015) as well as Santos (2015). There is yet no credible evidence demonstrating that the homosexual orientation is genetic in nature (Bradshaw, Heaton, Decoo, Dehlin, Galliher & Crowell, 2015). The claim that homosexual orientation is genetic in nature is only made by the media and, miserably, a number of researchers when engaging the public casually. Even though the homosexual orientation may run in my family, I may get bacteria from my parents as well, and various bad habits according to Schmidt, Shelley and Bardes (2014).

Read also Minimum Wage Increase and Its Impact – Argumentative Essay

According to me, the society should not embrace homosexuals since it destabilizes the typical, or traditional, family (Aldrich, 2015). according to Cele (2015) as well as Santos (2015). Both females and males make essential contributions to the life of the child. One of my friends frequently reminds me that young men who are devoid of father figures in their lives have a high chance of being incarcerated and engaging in destructive endeavors and behaviors. He is frequently quick to argue that he is well-behaved since his father and his mother have always been involved, as well as present, in his life. (Bradshaw, Heaton, Decoo, Dehlin, Galliher & Crowell, 2015). according to Cele (2015) as well as Santos (2015).  Is it caring to expose one’s child to the principally hurting way of life of gays? If individuals could learn homosexuality, what is the implication on the contention that some persons are born homosexuals?

Read also Homosexuality and Mental Health – The Connection

The society should not embrace homosexuals since gays have an elevated prevalence of infidelity. When one characterizes a relationship between homosexuals as monogamous, as well as loving, he or she fails to take into account the actuality of same-sex unions (Bradshaw, Heaton, Decoo, Dehlin, Galliher & Crowell, 2015). There is wide-ranging thinking that the principle or premise, on which the society ought to welcome the unions is that a number of the unions are relationships that are monogamous as well as loving according to Schmidt, Shelley and Bardes (2014).Even though the relationships may come off as monogamous, as well as loving, (Aldrich, 2015). (Bradshaw, Heaton, Decoo, Dehlin, Galliher & Crowell, 2015). When one leads or guides other persons into sin, he or she is not at all walking in actual love. There is only a limited chance that gays who are sexually involved with one another will remain faithful to each other always according to Schmidt, Shelley and Bardes (2014).The rate of fidelity between homosexuals is way below the rate of fidelity between heterosexuals. It is not odd for a gay person to have tens of tens of persons he or she is sexually involved within own life according to Cele (2015) as well as Santos (2015).

Read also Homosexuality – Is it Right or Wrong? – Ethics Paper

Besides, the society should not embrace homosexuals since homosexuality hurts the society’s fabric, particularly children. If the society were to embrace homosexuality and the unions, it would present to disadvantaged young people the message that the unions are healthy, morally welcome, and good (Aldrich, 2015). Notably, most religions shun and are averse to homosexual behaviors. Almost all medical practitioners concur that the unions are unhealthy. If the society embraces the immoral unions, it would make its young ones fall into immorality. If the society embraces the odd acts that define the unions, it would set itself up for sexual, as well as gender, confusion (Bradshaw, Heaton, Decoo, Dehlin, Galliher & Crowell, 2015). The confusion would breed wide-ranging immorality and tear down families. If the society allows advertisements projecting homosexuality as accepted, the young ones would think that homosexuality is proper. Notably, the agenda of the unions is to re-characterize the typical marriage all in all, which would destabilize and undermine the family regardless of its stability.

Read also The Society Should Embrace Homosexuals – Argumentative Essay

Without a doubt, the society should not welcome homosexuality and homosexuals. Rather, the society should eschew homosexuals. Credible evidence does not back the widespread disputation that the society ought to welcome homosexuals since they do not choose their odd sexual orientation. Notably, there is up till now no convincing evidence demonstrating that the homosexual orientation is hereditary in nature. The society should not embrace homosexuals since it destabilizes the characteristic family. All children require the family’s steadiness. The society should not welcome homosexuals as they have an eminent commonness of infidelity. As noted earlier, the rate of fidelity between homosexuals is way below the rate of fidelity between heterosexuals. Above and beyond, the society should not embrace homosexuals since homosexuality hurts the society’s fabric, for the most part, children. If the society hails the immoral unions, it would make its young ones fall into wickedness.

Share with your friends
Order Unique Answer Now

Add a Comment