Ethics Paper on Same-Sex Marriage
Ethics Paper on Same-Sex Marriage
Nowadays, same-sex marriages are legal, a legal advancement that triggered divergent views from different religions. As a result of this, some professionals in the wedding industry refuse to extend their services to gay and lesbians in obedience to their faith. This paper shall identify and discuss the ethical dilemmas surrounding this subject in regard to an article featured in the Wall Street Journal.
The state wants all the citizens to have equal treatment free from discrimination. In occasions like weddings, the state does not care whether it is between members of the opposite sex or not. The bottom line is that every individual deserves happiness and nobody have the right to cut the links that provide pleasure to another person. The beauty if this stand by the state is that a person has the space to maximize on his/her happiness. Maximum joy comes by way of engaging in activities that mean happiness to them.
However, every individual has their principles to guide them. Whether shaped by the cultural background or individual-formulated, the person restraints within the boundaries of the laws. Most of the people feel it is wrong to participate, directly or indirectly, in same-sex marriages. Guided by their principles, the people who uphold this notion will follow it to the word. The government, therefore, though acting with fairness by demanding for equal treatment for all, does not realize that it denies a larger portion of its population the space to exercise their beliefs.
The state guarantees its members the freedom of religion. It does not matter how awkward the figure of worship appears. Nobody should face discrimination on the basis of the religion they practice. It means that since every religion has the rules and regulations to govern the institution, a committed person must adhere to its principles. It is okay, since faith is personal, and one has their reasons for believing in one religion and not the other.Religion provides one with inner peace and, for this reason, it is best to settle for the one that satisfies the inner being. The states that demand the equal treatment of all people fail to realize that those opposed to the idea of same-sex marriages hate or lack value for the partakers. Rather, it is the religious doctrine that refrains them from participating. If the states forcefully make the opponents of same-sex marriages participate in the gayness activities, it is a discrimination of religious beliefs. Discriminating a religion to uphold fair treatment for all does not add up.
Even from a religious point of view, everyone has to work. The state too insists that in order to grow the economy of countries, people should create jobs. As long as the work is legit, people should toil as much as they can. Bakers, photographers, and florists are all specialists in the wedding industry, and their nature of work is legit. Their services make the wedding ceremonies colorful and memorable on top of earning a living. Additionally, it contributes to economic well-being of the nation.
However, it is wrong forcefully to ask someone to offer their services in the work that they feel is not legit. When the opponents of same-sex marriages get arraigned in court for refusing to provide their services for these activities, it is because they feel the business is not legit. As a result, the state needs to encourage them to stand their ground as a manner of demolishing illegal affairs. But the state cannot because, its preaching is fairness to all. It thus appears that gays and lesbians are more citizens if their opponents must obey their moves, according to the state.
Every citizen has the freedom of speech. The freedom is exercisable either through writing, spoken word, paintings, drawings or any other medium of communication. Wedding planners exercise this right because every flower arrangement they deem fit, every cake design, color, flavor, has a meaning to the newlyweds. Even the wedding cards appeal because of the freedom of expression exercised by the designers in the design of the cards. Therefore, those opposed to the idea of same–sex marriages have their freedom of speech deprived. When the state insists that these service providers must open their businesses to gay people and lesbians, it beats the logic of what free speech means.
What these service providers advise the couple in regard to the arrangement, design, shape, flavor, does not come out of their will, but force. The freedom of expression would apply to them if they said no to the approaches of the couple seeking their services. When the state forces them to attend to the needs of the gay while maintaining a sense of professionalism, the platform is an ethical dilemma. It denies one party (service providers) their right (freedom of expression) to extend it to the second party (gay couple) under a different umbrella (fair treatment).
Same-sex marriage is a subject that continues to attract the attention of many people. Religious doctrines seem to be the biggest repelling tool between the gays and lesbians and their religious opponents. Even though every individual wants to earn a living, some have sworn to miss the opportunities if they present themselves in servicing the gay activities.