Comparing William Bennett's Leave Marriage Alone and Andrew Sullivan's Let Gays Marry

However Bennett he brings up two points which divide opinions about same-sex marriage. One is whether homosexual marriage strengthens or weakens the institution of marriage. The other is what the definition of marriage is. If the definition of marriage were changed too much to include same-sex union, the tradition of marriage would be changed. However, there are many people who want alternatives to traditional marriage or want marriage to more than two people. Bennett asks how we can consider these people if we are changing the rules for same-sex couples. It is difficult to say what the right answer is. Marriage also means to decide your best partner. Everyone desires a beautiful life with a partner, but most marriage is not as the ideal as we think. He mentions that many supporters of same-sex couples do not share this ideal (Bennett p.30). Another different opinion from proponents to opponents of same-sex marriage is “the very heart of marriage itself” (Bennett p.30). Marriage tradionally is that of a man and a woman who love, respect, and help each other. Olson says the marriage case is about “rights and happiness and equal treatment” that is what people have learned in this society. The definition cannot be changed easily by anyone. In addition, this thought has been taught for a long time in history. Therefore, we should

Sheldon claims that ‘homosexual marriage is neither culturally nor physiologically possible’ (p. 1). He sustains that ‘without the cooperation of a third party, the homosexual marriage is a dead-end street - referring to the reproductive aspect of marriage (p. 1).

The definition of marriage has changed over time. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the United States defined marriage as a union between a consenting man and woman, of non-African decent (Stahlberg, 2008, p. 443). This, however, changed after the civil war. In 1868 two consenting adults of opposite gender could marry someone of the same race, but this was also restructured in 1967 to allow marriage of all consenting adults of opposite genders regardless of race (Stahlberg, 2008, p. 443). Today, the law looks very different. Recently, on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marriage (gay marriage, 2015).

The essay written by Katha Pollitt, titled, “What’s wrong with gay marriage” is an intriguing one. At first, the author, explains the notion that marriage and procreation do not necessarily go hand-in- hand. And later, she carefully interprets the true meaning of marriage; by stating that there is a separation of church and state. Most importantly, the author speaks to her audience in a clear and logical manner; without adding personal biases. Although the essay may seem to have deterministic view on social behavior. Nonetheless, I believe that does not disqualify the series of argument which she makes.

29) Allowing these marriages would change everything from behavior to the way the youth is raised. (Bennett p. 29) The intent of same sex marriages would be to strengthen and celebrate marriage, however, Bennett feels that this would not be reality. Bennett says that the religious issues will be brought up along with the ideas of what is a 4,000 year old tradition and that there is a fine line that needs to be addressed and watched. If one group of people were to marry, what would stop any other groups or any other strange arrangements from being made? (Bennett p. 30) What would stop a father form marrying his daughter or a bisexual marrying one of each sex? (Bennett p.30) Bennett feels that according to what Sullivan has stated, these marriages would have to be allowed otherwise these people would be excluded. If these others are not allowed then the homosexuals are receiving special treatment. Morality issues will be brought out and that fine line will be crossed and there will be nothing to uphold moral standards. This is a great country in which family and marriage are elevated and revered. (Bennett p. 30) “We should keep them so.” (Bennett p.30)

Gay marriage has been an issue for a very long time and since some states are legalizing it, many worry that it would soon be added as an amendment. The topic of gay marriage brings up religious, legal, and many other issues. In "What's wrong with Gay Marriage?" by Katha Pollitt, the author supports gay marriage and wants it legalized. She states that there is no problem with gay marriage and it's all a matter of separating the church and state. But in “Gay ‘Marriage’: Societal Suicide,” by Charles Colson, the author opposes the idea of gay marriage and states that it will destroy society. Marriage is intended to unite a man and a woman together to bring children into the world, but due to the same-sex marriage,

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

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.

In the article “For Gay Marriage” Andrew Sullivan claims that withholding marriage from homosexuals is perhaps the most social attack concerning their social likeness. Sullivan reasons that regardless of one’s sexual preference, one has the entitlement to marry a significant other. Likewise, Sullivan reinforces the idea of marriage by claiming that a contract such as marriage is, “...an emotional, financial, and psychological bond between two people; in this respect heterosexuals and homosexuals are identical” (30). In addition to discussing the definition of marriage in our society today, Sullivan enlightens the conservative idea that domestic partnerships diminish the idea of marriage (31). If a person

Bennett is trying to conclude that children are better off with heterosexual parents than homosexual parents. He is using the logical fallacy of begging the question. By using so many different logical fallacies throughout his academic

Bennett argues, rhetorically, that recognizing gay marriage would open the door to every other possible marriage, such as between two brothers who desire to marry and in situations where groups of individuals desire polygamous marriages. According to Bennett, if the basis of recognizing gay marriage is the notion of not denying a person's sexuality, all of those types of relationships are also entitled to legal recognition. Of course, that is a flawed argument because it presumes that proponents of gay marriage oppose any restriction on who may marry based on the single criteria of sexuality. In fact, the exact same argument was once used by opponents of interracial marriage. Proponents of gay marriage do not support incest, or polygamy, or bestiality; nor do they suggest that sexual desire is the only purpose of marriage or a justification for all marital choices.

Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage is a legal contract between a man and a woman. It is the institution that establishes kinship and relations in the family. Marriage is mostly recognized by a state, organization, religious authority, local community, or peers. Marriage is for procreation, education, the unity, and well-being of the couple. Some say marriage is for two people who love each other and ready for commitment. Nevertheless, in the bible times, couples were not allowed to choose the one him or her married. Therefore, the person he or she married was not the person him or her loved. Divorce was not an option; the couples had to learn to love the person they married. Stating this, marriage is not all about love and emotions, but the purpose of marriage. Marriage is unique and universal. (Rauch) Marriage of homosexual couples would not provide the same benefits of a heterosexual couple. Homosexual are not allowed to produce children. They must have vitro-fertilization or surrogacy. Same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry, because marriage is for a man and a woman, all religion is against gay marriages, and gay marriages are the slippery slope for other marriages. (Ferguson)

Furthermore, one of the biggest problems for society and probably the most important for new generations is that same-sex marriage would be that those couples will be able to adopt children if they are given the right to marry. “The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as

Bennett’s article is a response to Sullivan’s and states that gay marriages should not be allowed. Bennett (2002) believes that marriage is done in the sight of God and thus should be treated with high regards and also believes gay marriages to be corrupting today’s society. He believes that, “…marriage is not an arbitrary construct which can be redefined simply by those who and human realities. It is an honorable estate, instituted of God and built on moral, religious, sexual and human realities.”(2002:30) He goes on to explain how America’s most important institutions such as neighborhoods and schools are fine just the way they are without gay marriages. (2002:30)

As we know, same-sex marriage has been a prominent issue that has so many arguments not just in the United States, but around the world over many years now. There is absolutely nothing more controversial than same-sex marriage in gay rights topic. Everyone has different opinions about same-sex marriage whether it should be legal or not. We now have to consider two aspects that are moral and religious. These two form a fundamental belief that same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples are different. Based on the definition of marriage, the view of religion, bad effects to children, and the lifestyle that should not be encouraged; therefore, the government should not legalize the same-sex marriage.