Letter to Editor and Draft Initiative: Legalizing Gay Marriages in Arizona

The United States Supreme Court has approved same-sex marriages allowing the citizenry to vacate the long-standing morals mandated by the Bible, the blueprint that leads many people lives. The United States Constitution and charter are also available guides that grant freedoms especially the freedom of faith. Different privileges are not always good and on most occasions are not good at all. An individual's morality should be left to the person's moral code alone, otherwise; the moral enslavement pegged on prepared faiths would only cause a repeat of the middle ages history,that experienced endless warring between nations that sanctioned one sect of faith over another.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Views of such domination are visible every day in the words of Ron Hill, who regularly infuriate the mildest people along with his verbal undertones disguised in a sanctimonious veil of what God says or does. I think his utterances drawn from a fundamentalist sect, hurts those who disagree with his fanciful sermons. Even though one may accept their biased opinion of identical marriages, they are still in accordance with the law. Personally, I have no regard or partake of homosexuals, but till a Hitler comes and starts throwing them into ovens, I will still hold my tolerance against them.

Fundamental questions arise on the founding principles that guide the freedom of faith. Would Muslims and Christians express freedom of faith broadly if they needed to wear yarmulkes or all adhere to Muslims nutritional regulations? Freedom of faith does not equate, as many mistakenly are driven to think, practicing religion in the society. Regulations of the various cultural and religious beliefs may be lost to comply with especially with the demand of justifying what is wrong or right, whether they assume a spiritual angle or not.

With the aforementioned, voters will face the ballot to agree or not to adopt the identical marriages by amending the Arizona laws. Allowing same-sex marriages would be a failure of moral imagination that is not the character of noble mind s. Those who advocate for the identical marriages argue that there are parallels in the reasoning used in the Loving ruling with contemporary issues in the awaited homosexual decision delivered in 2015. Marriage should be conceptualized as an essential right between a man and a woman. Even as the debate rages on, the proposition against gay marriages should stand although every citizen has the liberty to accept it or decline.

Incredibly, those advocating for the adoption of cultural changes that will including same-sex marriages, are crusaders who are non-indigenous of Arizona who may be beneficiaries of their interests. The advocates must be quick to realize that forcing people to buy new ideas especially those that concern to behavioral requirements based on faith or culture is excess to the locals' rights and freedoms. The civil society within their ranks must stand to be countered as champions of human liberties detailing their immediate and long terms impacts when adopted by the society. The Arizona Together Coalition should have a wakeup call to speak out against the same-sex marriage syndrome as they have successfully prevented other perceivably awful irregularities within Arizona.

Whether everyone is open to the conversation of legalizing gay marriages in Arizona or not, changing the Arizona constitution and adopting the cultural and spiritual beliefs before understanding the indifferences it cost both the social norms and the economy, is inappropriate and very far from the truth. Residents of Arizona must decline to accept the new set of marriages. The neighboring States must not coerce them into engaging what they do not fully realize and accept eventual consequences.