|Greetings! Before I begin, I do have a quick question. When you say "Gay Marriage: The Cancer That Has Infected America’s Morals", is that supposed to be a restating of the title. I thought that was your intention but couldn't tell for sure. If it isn't, I think choosing one over the other will make your opinion more focused. Likewise, is this an essay or an editorial? It could work either way. If you wish to have it as an essay, I think your arguments need some fortification. With that out of the way, I read this and realized there's a lot I want to say in regards to content and structure.
When it comes to the Bible verses quoted, which version of the book are you using? There are slight wording changes among them, and we all know that different words lead to different interpretations of the same verse in the English language. My parents have a King James Bible, but the version I received as a gift from my grandmother is international (I think. I know for sure it's not King James, though). Though not likely, you might encounter some people who will debate with you how these verses were interpreted, and they might do that because their version phrases them a little differently. If you mention the version of the Bible you quote, then people can go directly to that book and see the text for themselves. It helps in giving opinions stronger credibility.
Anyone who claims to know my God and my Jesus yet still accepts gay marriage is a hypocrite.
That's a tough sell. Ruling out Unitarian Universalists, there are those in the conservative community that support gay marriage because it would support the notion of love as a sacred sanction and bolstering fidelity. Here's one such argument along those lines.
With Christianity being so large and diverse in its sects, there will be numerous opinions on how best to promote Christian values. Some will see permitting gay marriage as a way to bolster marriage in general. I think it's an opinion that both Christians and people in general should at least consider.
Societies have gone for the entire length of human existence without it, why the sudden push?
I have to admit this is a good question. I'm glad to see you brought it up, because it is something both sides should consider. I think this debate has been going on for so long both parties may have forgotten what sparked it in the first place (especially among those for gay marriage). I would like to see your answer to this question (instead of just skipping to the point of keeping the status quo). It's the one part of this essay that truly got my attention, and I would have liked to see you delve further into it. It could be in this very work, or it could be another editorial altogether. The choice is up to you.
Even harder pressed is the fact that there is proof that opposite sex marriages are not as stable as same-sex marriages.
This whole paragraph had me scratching my head. I reread it a couple times and realized that the point gets lost in mixed up phrases and the statistics being cited by a vague link that doesn't show readers exactly where to view the original information. Normally I would save this for the structure section, but here the structure affects the content more than anywhere else in the piece. The sentence I quoted above is a good example of this. I'm guessing that is supposed to have "same sex marriages" first followed by "opposite sex marriages". The way it is now almost advocates gay marriage. Here is another sentence where wording muddles the argument you're making.
In Sweden, where gay marriage is allowed, the divorce rate among men is one and a half times higher than that of their straight marriage counterparts.
While I figured you were comparing the divorce rates of gay and straight men, the lack of the word "gay" does look a little odd in that sentence. Finally, I noticed that you cited Imapp.org. It's certainly okay to use internet sources in any writing, but a URL by itself doesn't cut it. Where on the website did you find these statistics? Most citation styles (MLA, APA, etc.) will cite by either author or the title. If you can find that information, that will help readers find the information so they can view it themselves. I'll include a link to the MLA electronic sources citation guide. The site also has information for APA, which might be more appropriate.
Right now I have...is not already married.
You piqued my curiosity, so I pulled out my copy of the United States Constitution (which is located in a book containing Supreme Court opinions and dissents on over one hundred rulings in the nation's history). I combed through the document and checked for any relevant Supreme Court cases that would pertain to rights. While it establishes that all citizens of the age of consent do share certain rights (namely voting), I did not see anything pertaining to marriage in there. If you are going to mention the Constitution, it is paramount that would mention the article, section and any key clauses involved. The Constitution is actually a fairly easy read, so providing this information gives readers a road map to finding it, if you will. I could see the Ninth and maybe Section One of the 14th Amendment being used in your argument. Otheriwse, it seems to me you might be confusing the Constitution with more specific US (or even an individual state's) codes of law. If this is the case, I would recommend finding the specific law number and citing it. My go-to place for this information is the Libray of Congress. If you check out THOMAS, that system will have summaries, complete texts, and (co)sponsors of US laws. It's good stuff. Since you do attempt to introduce preexisting US law into the debate (which I never see, so kudos to you), I think some additional research will make your argument stronger.
Have you considered taking a financial angle on this issue? I admit the Biblical argument bored me a bit, as I was thinking I'd heard this before. The non-Biblical arguments did catch my attention, and I think exploring this issue from a financial standpoint would be a breath of fresh air in the debate. You might be able to weave the Constitution in there (although that still would require some work).
Watch your indentations. They are inconsistent, which can confuse readers. When I stumbled upon an unindented paragraph, I wondered if the points could be combined. One such example is the line starting "The city of Sodom..." To me, it seemed that part could have been combined with the previous paragraph. On the contrary, the line starting "In conclusion..." clearly shows a transition in thought and should be indented.
With an essay, you should have an introductory paragraph where you succintly state your point in one sentence and provide some context. The first three lines are a good base for this paragraph, but they should be set apart from the Biblical argument. That paragraph should also state that non-Biblical arguments against gay marriage will be made so we readers have an idea of what to expect (namely, something rarely seen on this side of the debate).
Now I know there are those that won’t accept the word of God, but I see this as one of the most compelling arguments against it.
When I first read this, my first question was "Against what, exactly?" I figured the "it" in question was gay marriage. With the way this sentence is worded, however, "it" could be accepting the word of God. It wouldn't hurt to clarify that.
Watch your sentence fragments. These two stuck out at me, and they think they could be combined with the preceeding sentences.
Such as the fact that we simply don’t need gay marriage.
Such as the argument that it is an equal rights issue.
Overall, the first paragraph almost made me apathetic, and I think any strengths in this piece stem from the presence of non-Biblical arguments. Right now, your arguments are not the strongest they could be to persuade others (either those for gay marriage or those apathetic to the issue) to even consider them. Some research and careful rewriting will make this piece stand out. For right now, though, it almost feels unfinished.