Is same-sex marriage a practical consideration in this age of globalisation?

Same-sex marriage is defined as a governmentally, socially, or religiously recognized marriage in which two people of the same sex live together as a family. Currently, in the conservative society of Singapore, same sex marriages are against the law and are banned. However in other more open societies such as the Netherlands, same sex marriages are legal and recognized. I believe that in this age of globalization where people are more open to new ideas while culture and tradition are slowly eroding; same-sex marriages have become a practical consideration in many societies.

Some argue that marriage is for the purpose of raising children and that two parents of the same sex are not adequately equipped to raise children. However, there is no basis in fact for this opinion. Children do well in homes where they are nutured and loved, regardless of the parents' genders. Besides, many heterosexual couples choose not to or are unable to have children yet their marriages are considered valid.
Some people object to same-sex marriage on purely religious grounds. They often claim that extending marriage to same-sex couples will undercut the conventional purpose of marriage as interpreted by cultural, religious, and traditional understanding. Furthermore, opponents argue that same-sex marriage cannot fulfill common procreational roles, and/or sanctions a partnership that is centered around sexual acts that their respective religion prohibits. However, homosexuals also have the basic human rights and should not be prevented by religious stance that prohibits it.

Libertarians and others may see marriage not as a legal construct of the state, but as a naturally occurring "pre-political institution" that the state must recognize as it recognizes other natural institutions such as jobs and families. They argue that the definition proposed by same-sex marriage advocates changes the social importance of marriage from its natural function of reproduction into a mere legality or freedom to have sex. These sides of the argument may refer to themselves as "defenders" of traditional marriage. As any customary relationship may be considered "marriage", some argue that this then leads to undue legislative burden and an affront to the social value and responsibility of parenting one's own children.

"Because marriage is a basic human right and an individual personal choice, the State should not interfere with same-gender couples who choose to marry and share fully an equally in the rights, responsibilities, and commitment of civil marriage." Therefore, in conclusion, I believe that we should not discriminate against the homosexuals and deny them of their rights to happiness.