In this blog post, I will examine the reasons why same-sex marriage should be legalized, focusing on the meaning and evolution of marriage, individual rights and the right to pursue happiness, and the social problems that may arise if legalization is restricted.

The Changing Meaning of Marriage and Social Perceptions

We now live our lives pursuing happiness and asserting our rights. As mass media has evolved, the voices asserting these rights have grown louder, and it has become natural to share one’s thoughts with others and spark social discourse. In particular, even on sensitive topics where it was difficult to express one’s opinion publicly just a few years ago, it is now considered normal to speak out freely. One example is the case of TV personality Hong Seok-cheon, who came out as gay. Along with these changes, public perception of sexual minorities is gradually expanding, and the scope of social discourse is broadening—moving beyond the question of whether same-sex love should be recognized to the question of whether same-sex marriage can be legally recognized. I support the legalization of same-sex marriage based on the following grounds.
Marriage is a commitment between two people, and the meaning of that commitment, as well as the form of marriage, can change according to the circumstances of the times. Article 36, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea stipulates that “Marriage and family life shall be established and maintained on the basis of the dignity of the individual and the equality of the sexes, and the State shall guarantee this.” Furthermore, marriage is generally understood as an institution that forms relationships among individuals who constitute a family and is seen as one way to create a family. From this perspective, people have long regarded marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman and as a means of forming a family. However, in recent years, with the emergence of films such as ‘The King and the Clown’, ‘Ssanghwa-jeon’, and ‘Life Is Beautiful’—which deal with same-sex relationships—public attitudes toward homosexuality have begun to shift gradually. Furthermore, socially prominent figures—such as entertainer Hong Seok-cheon, the couple Chae Yoon and Yoon Mi-kyung, and film producer Kim Jo-gwang-su—have publicly disclosed their sexual orientations or same-sex relationships and discussed same-sex marriage in public, turning these topics into social issues. These examples have had a significant impact on shifting social perceptions of homosexuality and same-sex relationships. In other words, while marriage was once viewed solely as a union between a man and a woman, there has been a gradual increase in the number of people who believe that, as long as two people love each other, men and men or women and women should be able to date and marry.
Compared to past social attitudes, it is evident that perceptions regarding same-sex marriage are also shifting. While surveys at that time showed that opposition to the legal recognition of same-sex marriage outweighed support, there was also a trend indicating that the percentage of supporters increased as the age group decreased. This suggests that, even if South Korea’s social norms are not changing rapidly overnight, they are gradually evolving in step with the times. However, since the specific figures and age-based percentages presented in the survey have limitations as data that directly reflect current social attitudes, it is necessary to examine today’s views on same-sex marriage alongside separate, up-to-date surveys.
There have been many instances in the past where social perceptions have shifted. For example, the right to vote was initially restricted to certain social classes or primarily to men, but through the gradual advancement of human rights and changes in public perception, voting rights were extended to Black people and other racial groups, and over time, women’s suffrage was also recognized. Similarly, legal recognition of same-sex marriage can also change through shifts in public perception and social discourse. Although it is difficult to conclude that support for the legalization of same-sex marriage currently constitutes a majority across society as a whole, it is clearly evident that people’s perceptions are shifting in line with the changing times. Furthermore, at a time when interest in the human rights of minorities is growing, legally recognizing same-sex marriage could serve as a catalyst to drive changes in public consciousness and transform the social climate.

Should Same-Sex Marriage Be Guaranteed as an Individual Right?

Same-sex marriage is also an issue related to individual rights. Article 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea stipulates that all citizens possess human dignity and value and have the right to pursue happiness. Furthermore, the state has the duty to recognize and guarantee the inviolable fundamental human rights of individuals. From the perspective of LGBTQ+ individuals, same-sex marriage is also connected to the right to live the life they choose, form a family, and pursue happiness. Therefore, the state must guarantee individual rights so that those who desire same-sex marriage can choose their own lives and pursue happiness. Furthermore, Article 11 of the Constitution stipulates that no one shall be discriminated against in any sphere of political, economic, social, or cultural life on the grounds of sex, religion, or social status. Accordingly, laws and social attitudes toward homosexuality or same-sex marriage should not be judged solely on the basis of specific religious beliefs or outdated notions, nor should individuals be unfairly discriminated against on the grounds of sexual orientation. One cannot simply deem a person problematic merely because they are homosexual. It is wrong to be swept up by social pressures and treat homosexuals as beings distinct from “normal” people.
Furthermore, Article 37, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution stipulates that the freedoms and rights of citizens shall not be disregarded on the grounds that they are not enumerated in the Constitution. Article 37, Paragraph 2 stipulates that all freedoms and rights of citizens may be restricted by law only when necessary for national security, the maintenance of public order, or the public welfare; even in such cases, the essential content of those freedoms and rights shall not be infringed upon. Based on these constitutional provisions, the rights of homosexuals who are citizens of the Republic of Korea—and the claims they make regarding their own lives—must not be arbitrarily silenced or infringed upon. Although the current legal system of the Republic of Korea does not recognize same-sex marriage as a legal marriage, this does not mean that the lives and relationships of people who desire same-sex marriage should be denied. Before opposing the legalization of same-sex marriage, we must first consider what specific harm these individuals have caused to others. We cannot conclude that the mere fact that homosexuals pursue their love and relationships harms national security or the public welfare of society. If they are simply pursuing their own happiness and living their own lives, we need to carefully examine what justifiable grounds there are for oppressing them.
Those who oppose same-sex marriage may counter the above argument as follows: According to Article 37, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution, fundamental rights—including the right to pursue happiness—may be restricted by law when necessary for national security, the maintenance of public order, or the public welfare; therefore, same-sex marriage can also be restricted to maintain the current social order. However, I would like to respond as follows. Whose social order are we talking about? Can a system that infringes upon the happiness of a minority for the sake of the majority’s interests truly be called a genuine order? Order is created by everyone; it is not absolutely fixed but can change according to the times and societal shifts. Therefore, social order should not be directed solely toward upholding the standards of a select few, but rather toward ensuring the freedom and happiness of as many people as possible.

What are the consequences for society of blocking legalization?

Furthermore, from the perspective of social benefit, we need to consider what is actually gained by opposing same-sex marriage. Here, we can apply the concept of the “balloon effect.” Imagine pressing down on a balloon with your hand. The part you press in collapses inward, but the balloon as a whole does not disappear. Instead, other parts of the balloon expand to compensate for the compressed area. Applying this to the issue of same-sex marriage legalization, the fact that same-sex marriage is not legally recognized does not mean that same-sex love or relationships themselves will disappear. Currently, South Korea does not legally recognize same-sex marriage, but imposing even stricter restrictions will not make same-sex relationships disappear. Rather, it risks pushing relationships that already exist in society outside the legal framework. If we uniformly deny relationships that people consider legitimate ways of life or treat them as if they were crimes, it could lead to social harm.
First, it may instill a sense of guilt, making people feel that their actions are not justified and that they are doing something socially wrong. Even now, there are cases where same-sex couples cannot openly reveal their relationships in front of others. Furthermore, if society denies their relationships even more strongly and imposes legal sanctions, the situation could become even more serious. The result could be no different from driving a minority to the margins of society in the name of the majority.
Second, even the same behavior is likely to become further distorted if it takes place in the shadows, outside the scope of institutional frameworks and societal scrutiny. Social solutions are also needed for the various problems that can arise from relationships not legally recognized. If same-sex love itself is denied or treated as something that must be hidden, additional social problems may emerge simply because people cannot disclose their relationships. If such a situation begins to be exploited for economic gain, it could escalate into an even more serious problem. A historical example that illustrates this point is the Prohibition era in the United States. In the early 20th century, the U.S. enacted Prohibition laws banning the manufacture and sale of alcohol for religious and political reasons, among others. However, this led to an expansion of the illegal alcohol trade and contributed to the growth of organized crime. Ultimately, contrary to the original intent, unexpected side effects emerged.
It is also necessary to carefully examine the potential social benefits cited by opponents. While one may oppose same-sex marriage based on specific ethical or religious beliefs, it is not right to impose those beliefs equally on all members of society. The freedom of an individual not to accept same-sex marriage based on their own religious and ethical values must be distinguished from the freedom of other individuals to choose their own lives and love.

Why Is the Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage Necessary?

Thus far, we have examined the arguments in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage through the lens of the meaning of marriage, individual choice and rights, and the concerns that could arise if it is not legalized. To briefly summarize these three arguments: first, since marriage is a commitment between two people, its meaning and form can evolve over time. Of course, negative attitudes toward same-sex marriage still persist in South Korea today. However, this merely means that social attitudes have not yet changed sufficiently; it is also evident from various examples in society that these attitudes are indeed shifting. The portrayal of same-sex relationships in movies and TV dramas has become far more natural than in the past, and there are growing instances of public figures openly discussing their sexual orientation or same-sex relationships. Therefore, we need to rethink the meaning of marriage—where two people in love promise to live together officially—in light of changing times by legally recognizing same-sex marriage. The second argument is that the freedom to form a marriage and family life is also a crucial issue related to individual dignity and the pursuit of happiness. The Constitution of the Republic of Korea guarantees the right to pursue happiness, and same-sex marriage is also tied to an individual’s right to choose their own life and pursue happiness. People continue to assert their rights and can argue that their chosen actions or lifestyles are undertaken for their own happiness. Such individual happiness must not be arbitrarily infringed upon or criticized solely on the basis of another person’s values. The third argument concerns the social harms that could arise if same-sex marriage is not legally recognized. As illustrated by the “balloon effect” discussed earlier, failing to legalize same-sex marriage does not mean that homosexuality itself will disappear. The law cannot prevent people from being attracted to those of the same sex. Consequently, in a society that does not legally recognize same-sex relationships, some people may feel compelled to hide their relationships, and they may develop a sense of guilt because they cannot openly reveal their relationships to society. Just as racial discrimination was once justified in the past, this could result in the majority unilaterally denying the lives of the minority. Furthermore, if homosexuality and same-sex relationships are treated in the same way as crimes, this could lead to additional problems and social side effects arising from attempts to conceal them. While opposition to same-sex marriage often stems from specific religious or ethical reasons, it is important to consider that the harms resulting from discrimination and exclusion may outweigh any social benefits gained through such opposition.
Opposition to same-sex marriage based on specific religious or ethical grounds is an argument that warrants reconsideration in an era where much has changed from the past and continues to evolve rapidly. While it is not necessary to change everyone’s perception all at once, same-sex marriage can be viewed as a matter of expanding the scope of existing rights and institutions, much like the past expansion of voting rights. We cannot simply insist that we must unconditionally uphold only the Confucian and religious views of the past. Homosexuality clearly existed in the past, but just because it was viewed negatively then does not mean we must necessarily view it that way today. Not all past actions were correct, nor are we bound to follow all past social norms to this day. Legalizing same-sex marriage does not infringe upon the rights of those who oppose it. On the other hand, the right to have one’s relationship with a loved one officially recognized and to have the right to live one’s life together is also an important issue for LGBTQ+ individuals. Therefore, the legalization of same-sex marriage is not simply a matter of adding another form of marriage; rather, it is an opportunity for us to reflect together on individual dignity, happiness, equal rights, and the ways in which society is changing.