The article I will be deconstructing is so pleasantly and simply titled, “10 Reasons Why Homosexual ‘Marriage’ is Harmful and Must be Opposed”. I’d like to preface my paper with this: It was posted and written by FTP Student Action, a fundamentally conservative student organization. Many of their statements are based on biblical teachings and beliefs. As such, many of the arguments presented are subjective and perceived validity will vary with one’s religious standpoint.
The primary claim is that homosexual marriage is morally, socially, and biologically wrong. Each supporting statement is separated into list format, so the connecting thread ended up being a bit disjointed. Collectively the argument appears deductive, though unsound. It
…show more content…
Given these two statements, it is concluded that a union of two of the same gender would not constitute a real marriage. This would be considered an appeal to tradition fallacy. Saying that something must be done a certain way because it’s always been done that way does not mean that it is the true or right thing to do.
Next, they argue that homosexual relations are a violation of natural law. It’s stated that marriage “is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law”. This would be engaging in an appeal to nature fallacy: a tactic in which it is proposed that "a thing is good because it is 'natural ', or bad because it is 'unnatural '". It is also untrue. Marriage is an not an institution ingrained in natural law- it is a societal construct that has no empirical definition other than what society has decided it to be.
It is then claimed that non-hetero families raise children “deprived of either his natural mother or father”. They make the analogy that there are “evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.” This could be considered a false analogy due to the fact that in most homosexual families there is not just one parent involved in raising the child. The writer uses these cases to conclude that “same-sex ‘marriage’ ignores a child’s best interests”,
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
Thomas B. Stoddard’s “Gay Marriages: Make Them Legal” is a successfully written argument with some minor flaws in technique. Stoddard uses this article to present his major claim, or central thesis, on the reasons gay marriage should be legalized. He presents his argument using minor claims. In a lecture on February 2, 2005, James McFadden stated a minor claim is the secondary claim in an argument. Stoddard uses minor claims in his discussion of homosexual people being denied their rights by the government and by others who discriminate against them. He also discusses how love and the desire for commitment play a big part in the argument for and against gay marriage.
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 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.
Overall, the article is interesting since this is an issue I feel strongly about. My favorite part is when the article it states, “We no longer see marriage as a labor contract but as a love commitment Graff 2).” In other words, the definition of marriage has changed from simply gaining more property or goods to being where a person is able to choose who they want to be with out of love. Another thing when the author was talking about briefly about the history of marriage something she didn’t was in Greece, the Spartans I believe actually allowed homosexuality instead of prohibiting it. However, it was only allowed between man. Another thing before India was influenced by
Arguments for gay and lesbian families is a concern for the sanctity of marriage is often accompanied by a discomfort with the idea of gay and lesbian families, based on misinformation about the quality of those relationships and their impact on children (Kimmel 184). Arguments that support gay and lesbian families are mainly focused on having the same equal rights as heterosexuals. Many gay and lesbian couples want to get married because of the benefits they acquire such as the right to inherit from a spouse who dies without a will, the right to consult with doctors and make crucial decisions (Kimmel 184). A meta analysis of social studies of gay and lesbian parenting suggests that children are more accepting of homosexuality and maybe more likely to indicate a willingness to consider homosexual relationships themselves (Kimmel 186). Another great example is daughters of lesbian and gay parents are more assertive, confident, and ambitious, and sons are less conforming to traditional masculine aggression and domination and have a better understanding of their gender identity (Kimmel
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
Same-sex couples are becoming increasingly popular in our society and advocates have been pushing for social justice to abolish sexual discrimination. America has been misled by opponents of the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts who claim a business' right to religious freedom to turn away gay customers is discrimination and bigotry, and we need to return to the biblical view of homosexuality as what it really is: sin. This paper will cover religious freedom and the advancement of gay rights in society today as it pertains to the opposing arguments of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act passed recently in Indiana.
The source article states that a same sex marriage is not a healthy marriage. The four main points that it illustrates are the emotional and physical hazards of a same sex marriage. The article quotes a variety of sources that lend support to the four points. Comparing heterosexual and homosexual marriages and relationships while maintaining the facts that traditional marriages are healthier and last longer. The write of the article describes last why homosexual individuals should not have or raise children.
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.
Firstly, is the notion of fidelity, and who seeks infidelity. The conservativeness of Bennett’s ideals of marriage are simple, completely faithful something he claims gay couples cannot commit to. A claim from Bennett is that, “[marriage’s] essential idea is fidelity”(272) and with “a homosexual marriage…[there is] a greater need for ‘extramarital outlets’”(272). He is not wrong that an essential factor in marriage is the fidelity of partners, but Bennett suggests only homosexual couples seek relationships outside of their marriages; however he seems to be uneducated or unaware of the fact that heterosexual couples do not always fit in nice little
The last argument for the marriage section is the loss of the gay culture as they will try to cope with the culture of a traditional family. This argument brings up a good point in the way of would the gay culture vanish if we just accepted same sex families to be as any other family, but then we should also ask that would it be a bad thing if the gay culture was lost. But, this was again countered by the LGBT community stating that, “The gay pride culture is what unites us together and that no matter what we will always be gay and the LGBT community will strive for the equality on all people both gay and straight” (ProCon).
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
For years and years, homosexuals have fought for the right to marry their loved one. It has been looked down upon, called immoral, sinful, and deeds of the devil, but that is not the way it is seen by those who support or engage in it. Supporters view marriage as the union of two individuals who love each other. They no longer see it as the concept of "traditional marriage". They believe traditional marriage has changed over time, and that the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman is historically inaccurate (should