Rhetorical Precis Austin Reynolds, in his term paper, “ k,” proves with strong assertations that there is evidence to support the legalization of homosexual marriage, though many would argue that it will harm the sanctity of marriage and harm the right to freedom of religion. Reynolds supports his ideas by expounding upon the inequality that LGBT people are given and how gay marriage will bring harm to no man, women, or child. The author’s purpose is to inform the reader on all aspects of gay marriage so they understand the controversial reasoning behind the idea as well as the arguments against the proposal. Reynolds writes in a formal tone for the American Studies English teachers at Granite Hills High School. Introduction Imagine you live in a world where you can’t ever be married to the person you love. Thats it. No matter what you do you cannot marry them because of a religious group. Imagine someone tells you that you can’t eat a donut because they are on a diet. Now lets come back to reality and discover that the imagining you just did is a person’s everyday life. Realize that they wake up everyday to ignorant people bestowing their beliefs upon other people and attempting to give them less rights. What other piece of American history does this parallel? This parallels the Civil Rights movement in the 1950’s. Stores and restaurants were refusing service to black people because of the way they came into this world. Nobody has a say in what skin color they or their
On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Many conservative groups do NOT agree with this decision. The gay marriage debate has been simmering for as long as I can remember. The four articles I have selected give information from four different perspectives including that of liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and orthodox Jews. With so many differing opinions, one can understand why it's been so hard for the nation to come to agree on this issue.
For the past 3 decades the views surrounding marriage has undergone a great deal of change (Lennox, 2015, p. 1101). This shift is due to the continual discussion of gay marriage. The interplay of religion and politics has led for much controversy. In the United States, the use of Christian and Jewish biblical texts are the main sources drawn upon for opposition, but have also been used as a supportive means of equality. Beyond the religious there are also psychological and physical health arguments, as well as civil rights arguments. Same sex marriage is examined through different paradigms, thus giving rise to religious, political/legal, and religious arguments surrounding the legalization of this institution for gay and lesbian couples.
Strongly against gay marriage is the central theme of Louis P. Sheldon’s article Gay Marriage “Unnatural”. According to the author’s views, gay marriage is ‘unnatural’, and
It is true that marriage in this nation traditionally has been regarded as a relationship exclusively between a man and a woman, and many of our nation’s multiple religions define marriage in precisely those terms. But with the Supreme Court has always previously considered marriage in that context, the underlying rights and liberties that marriage embodies are not in any way confined to heterosexuals. One’s sexuality is not a preference, it is immutable, unchangeable, and the Constitution protects us all against prejudices and discrimination based on immutable differences. Not only is not allowing same-sex couples to marry discriminatory, it also makes gays second class citizens. When we as a nation refuse to accord the same marital status to gays and lesbians, we discourage same-sex couples from forming the same relationships we encourage for others, and we are essentially telling gays, those of who love them, and society as a whole that their relationships are less worthy, less legitimate, less permanent and less valued. By not legalizing same-sex marriages the US demeans their relationships and demeans gays as individuals. Same-sex marriages must be legalized.
Debates about gay marriage continue to simmer within American public discourse, though much of the more heated rhetoric has calmed since the earliest efforts to legalize same-sex marriage succeeded in numerous states. These debates have spanned many topics, ranging from religion to politics and beyond. Andrew Sullivan, a prominent gay and self-described conservative political commentator, addressed one angle of the issue in his July 19, 2011 Newsweek Magazine article “Why Gay Marriage is Good for America.” Through a mixture of personal reflection, social commentary, and political argumentation, Sullivan’s article is less a defense of gay marriage than it is a defense of the idea that gay marriage is compatible with conservative political values. Although Sullivan makes a good case for his position in the article, his argument is ultimately under-developed; the lengthy personal reflections serve to reinforce a relatively minor point in the context of the larger argument, shifting focus away from the more relevant portions of the argument.
Critique of Bennett’s “Against Gay Marriage” Gay marriage is repeatedly under the magnifying glass in the media, the papers, and constantly opposed by adamant conservative politicians. In his piece “Against Gay Marriage,” Bennett demonstrates this issue. William Bennett himself is a married conservative politician. Due to this, we can better understand the flailing urgency of his argument against homosexual marriage. Bennett takes a very strong and adamant approach to what is a particularly sensitive subject at this moment in time, and leaps into act of persuading his audience to turn away from the idea of legalizing gay marriage, or even to reject it.
Timothy Stewart-Winter wrote an opinionated article called The Price of Gay Marriage; in it he describes both the downfalls of having gay marriage legalized in this past year and how it is a great achievement for the gay community. He also talks about what the gay community had to go through to get to this point. Legalizing gay marriage is a great achievement for many groups being discriminated against. Legalizing gay marriage does not have a price that must be paid for its progress. Stewart-Winter’s article made the consequences of legalizing gay marriage known; his down fall was filling his arguments with fallacies and pathos making his article okay.
never voted for same-sex marriage, that their rights should not be granted. They also argued that the LGBT community should not be allowed to redefine marriage. As a result, the backer of Prop. 8 urged the gay community to take the issue to a ballot. Instead of allegedly conspiring with the judges to rule in their favor, which goes against the will of the people.
There are many controversies surrounding today's world, such as abortion, animal testing, and social reform issues. It seems that no one can come to a common agreement on the legitimacy of these topics. Personal characteristics, such as upbringing, culture, religion and ethnicity, all play a role in determining one's feelings on a given controversial issue. However, one of the most protested and discussed issues in current political debate is same-sex marriage. There is no right or wrong answer to this question, only hard pressed arguments expressing speculation regarding supposed outcomes, benefits and possible tribulations that would come along with the endorsement of gay marriage. Such ideas are shown
Though there are differences in the views of different faiths, conservative Protestants, the Catholic Church, Mormons, traditional Jews, and Muslims share two fundamental antigay arguments. The first is that homosexuality is wrong because it involves sex that doesn 't create life. In the case of Judaism, a key Bible passage is the story of Onan (Links to an external site.), who sleeps with his dead brother 's wife but, to avoid giving his brother offspring, doesn 't ejaculate inside her. Instead, he "spilt the seed on the ground." God slew him, which some might view as a sign of disapproval (Links to an external site.).The Catholic catechism decries (Links to an external site.) homosexual acts because "they close the sexual act to the gift of life." Early American antisodomy laws discouraged all forms of non-procreative sex (including, incidentally, heterosexual oral and anal sex). Islam shares a similar view. One Islamic hadith explains that Allah "will not look at the man who commits sodomy with a man or a woman." But if non-procreative sex is the issue, society started down the slippery slope not with the recent Supreme Court ruling but with production of the pill—or, really, even earlier, when birth control became common. We 've been into the non-procreative sex thing for some time now. Even most religious conservatives don 't have the heart to go after this. If sex without the possibility of creating life is wrong, then religious
3.8% of Americans are either gay or lesbian. Gay marriage is a very controversial topic in today's world. Some people are against it and others are for it. Gay marriage should not be legalized because not only does it violate laws, but it affects religion.
The proposed legalization of same-sex marriage is one of the most significant issues in contemporary American family law. As a heavily campaigned development currently discussed in law assessment; these extremely confrontational and debatable political questions are facing present day American courts. If same-sex marriage is legalized, its affect on the parents, children, same sex couples, families, and the social and political world will be astronomical. The arguments surrounding the issue though confrontational nonetheless are easily seen from a wide array of perspectives. One of the perspectives states that marriage is a promise to a spouse to stay loyal and faithful in all
As we know, same-sex marriage has been discussed and argued for a long time. Within the controversial topic of gay rights, there’s no area more controversial than same-sex marriage. And all of us ask ourselves if same-sex marriage should be legal or not. But the fact is that we have to start thinking about it as a moral and religious topic. The government shouldn’t legalize the same-sex marriage because the
One of the most controversial issues around today is gay marriages. Many believe that the media is primly responsible for the idea of same-sex marriages, but when it all comes down to it there are really only two sides; those who support gay marriages, and those who oppose them. Two authors write their opinions on their opposite views on this issue. Sullivan (2002) supports same-sex marriages and believes marriage to be a universal right, not just restricted to heterosexuals. Contrary to Sullivan, Bennett (2002) believes that marriage is a sacred traditional family value that should be set aside for heterosexual couples. (2002)Throughout this essay, I will summarize both authors’ ideas and evaluate them through their evidence and
People are born homosexual. If you are homosexual you cannot get married. That idea is ridiculous. On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Marriage is defined as a sacred bond of love between two people. Gay people also feel love therefore, they should be allowed the same rights as everyone else in this country. Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with a proven biological causation. The only thing that should matter in marriage is love and denying them this is a violation of religious freedom.