Whether or not you back it, we can feel the euphoria sweeping across the globe on and after 26 June 2015 when the Supreme Court of the US legalised same-sex marriage. The US, as the so-called leader of the world has placed itself as a leading example on advancing and putting more emphasis on the importance of human rights, while the right to marry and form family is always part of human rights, regardless of people’s sexual preferences. We can see now that this legal system has erased the differing lines between “opposite-sex marriage” and “same-sex marriage”: there is neither of it, there is only “marriage”; which reflects equality best. I myself view this as a success of putting the needs and will of human beings in the highest place of all, but I also have a hypothesis about what could happen next, some kind of prediction.
In my opinion, the legalisation of same-sex marriage in all 50 states of the USA is a big success of humanity. As a following effect of this law, human beings are regarded as human beings, respected, and viewed equally no matter of their sexual preferences. everyone can marry as they agree to live together on the basis of emotional bond, and has his/her relationship registered by the government. This is what same-sex couples have been seeking for. Like the “traditional” heterosexual couples, this law gives them access to form civil union, having their relationship protected legally. They also gain access to be protected by family law concerning adoption, tax breaks, child benefit, more allowance from the work place, and so on. These are the social benefits that can be obtained by a family on the ground of marriage. In Indonesia, it is equal to tunjangan anak (child allowance) and tunjangan istri (wife allowance) for a husband working as state employee or for the army (navy, air force, etc.). It shows that marriages can be equal. once again, sexual preference is a private sphere: one has his/her full right to decide with which gender one would like to be married with, and has the right to have their relationship protected legally and to obtain civil society benefits. Marriages can be equal, in case of civil society life.
However, if we look at the “traditional” definition and the essence of marriage, it was always the union of a man a woman who agree to live together in a (maybe) lifetime contract on the basis of emotional bond. And, what makes it essential is that this relationship is combined with the biological function of procreation/reproduction, which is (normally and unfortunately) only to be done by two people (in this context, a monogamous marriage) from different sexes (although marriage is not always the precondition for this function). Two people of opposite sexes committed to living together and have children, that is (or was) the essence and norms of marriage as smallest institutions in civil society. As an addition, marriage is essential because the family members have genetic relationship between generations. It’s true that in some cases, opposite sex couples may have this not working due to infertility or other dysfunctions, but the chance is usually little. This biological function does not work out for same-sex couples, but yes, they can always adopt children.
I believe that human beings are intelligent and always have alternative ways concerning this matter. If I am to deny the equality of same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples on the ground of biological relations, one can refute with an alternative or two. If biological relations makes the family bond even stronger, then same-sex couples can have it, too (this view may still be hypothetical as debates going on in my mind). Gay couples might want to have a biological child that have genetic features like one of them, so they can have the service of a woman willing to do surrogacy. For lesbian couples, they may give birth to a biological child with the help of sperm obtained from sperm bank or a donor. What a time to be alive! people are equal to each other regardless of their backgrounds, and more importantly everyone can marry someone of any sex and live equally.
Apart from the good sides, we would also have our society and culture changed, or maybe they have. the culture and norms of marriage has shifted. As mentioned before, family consists of a husband and a wife, a father and a mother. With the number of married same-sex couples about to surge significantly in the US and other parts of the world, the view towards a family is about to change. I would say that a father and a mother are both essential and obligatory for a family, apart from the fact that there are single parents. A father and a mother is a must-have feature of a family. Along with the increasing number of same-sex couples, the value of a father and a mother will diminish: a father and a mother, that represent different genders (masculinity and femininity, which is significant, will turn into optional features of a family, rather than obligatory. It has always been said that gender is a social construct: a man can be masculine or feminine, and so can a woman, regardless of their biological feature the defines them as male or female. But can one of two father in a gay couple’s family replace this feminine role by a mother or the role of a father in a lesbian couple’s family? I may not know now but frankly, I think not. The norms of marriage will shift among the new generations: the social value of a father and a mother will diminish.
As I said, I have an hypothesis of what could happen later in the future. If same-sex couples were to gain equality even in biological matter of reproduction, surrogacy and sperm donor would be a business of huge advantage and profit, working as agents in the field of reproduction of younger generations. The younger generations in the future would live in opposite-sex couple families, gay-couple families, or lesbian-couple families. However, it is inevitable that they would eventually learn that a baby is born from sexual intercourse of two people of different sexes, which would be contradictory to the reality that they lived with two gay fathers or two lesbian mothers. They would eventually learn that they are born through surrogacy, which represent the reproduction function of a woman, or sperm donor, which represent that of a man. At this point, they would say that a father or a mother is not necessary in a family. There is a chance that a man or a woman would only be seen by some people for his or her reproduction capacity.
“I was born because a woman was willing to give birth for my dads.”
“I was born because a generous man was willing to be a sperm donor to one of my moms.”
A “man” and a “woman” (that can be “father” and “mother”) would only be seen as “male” and “female” due to their biological function for reproduction only. Then a question comes up to my mind: would being a father or a mother be still worth it anymore?
This might not have happened yet, and might not happen in the future. But, just as homosexuality seen as disease back then, it is now a pride worth having. Things can change. A law can change culture, and culture change society. There is always a chance for anything to happen. People change, so does society. After all, are marriages really equal?
You may want to change my view, as I still do not know many things. I’d be glad to receive responses whether you agree or disagree.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar