Why ShouldnT Tommy And Jim Have Sex John Corvino Analysis

Hence, adultery is not banned universally because adultery is a private matter. Here, Steinbock commits the fallacy of equivocation which means a word shifts from its meaning from one premise to another. The word adultery shifts its meaning from a criminal offense to a private matter in the same argument. Such a change of meaning always makes an argument invalid and makes the argument unbelievable. Additionally, in the same section, Steinbock denies that practical considerations such as unwanted pregnancies and venereal disease can be used against adultery because not only does adultery face the risk of unwanted pregnancies and venereal disease, but it will also include all non-exclusive sex. This argument is also invalid because the premise does not intend to support its conclusion. Stating the risks adultery and non-exclusive sex will all face does not prove that the risks themselves are not harmful and cannot be used against adultery. On the contrary, for example, venereal diseases are serious illnesses that require treatment. Some venereal diseases such as HIV cannot be cured and may be deadly. Therefore, if Steinbock wants to prove that the risks such as venereal disease are not reasons for opposing adultery, she needs to provide more reasonable evidence to support her conclusion. Otherwise, it will be difficult to make readers believe what she has written. Moreover, in order to indicate that

In the article Corvino first explains the relationship of two gentlemen named Tommy and Jim that are living together that homosexuals and are in a loving relationship before he goes into depth of why they should be able to have sex because it is not unnatural for them to do so if they please. Corvino provides different scenarios or versions of arguments that would say homosexuality is unnatural or wrong but he combats these arguments with firm facts or he explained why the arguments weren’t strong enough to stand.

In John Corvino’s essay, “Why Shouldn’t Tommy and Jim Have Sex?” he advocates his argument that gay sex is not “unnatural” in any moral way. However, this argument is easy to critique when considering opposition from natural law theorists, democracy, and other perspective ideas.

Andrew Sullivan is the author of an article “Why Gay Marriage is Good for Straight America.” He is an experienced publicist, and he is homosexual. Sullivan argues that every person has the right to get married disregarding his or her orientation. Richard Rodriguez who is also a famous publicist composed “Family Values.” Like Sullivan, he is homosexual and he discusses it in his work. Rodriguez and Sullivan share many viewpoints related to homosexuality, but they disagree about the appropriateness of homosexual marriage – Sullivan is for it, and Rodriguez views it as an imitation of heterosexuality.

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.

Corvino defends homosexuality by comparing it to other “natural” occurrences. If Corvino defended homosexuality with many good points in his argument couldn’t it have been the same if it was biologically-full siblings? He counter-attacks arguments that say homosexuality is disgusting, unusual, pro-choice,harmful, violates the natural act of sexual organs,etc. Although biologically-full siblings may be unnatural and disgusting, he would say that these grown adults who are sterile cannot be harmful since they cannot pro-create which would have lead to a deformity of a child created from incest. Corvino makes you realize how dumb you are if you believe in everything else, but homosexuality. In Why Shouldn’t Tommy and Jim have Sex? he states, “But

Robert George is a Princeton professor, an adamant dissenter of same-sex marriage, and was a strong supporter of Proposition 8. One of the most prevalent arguments used by Robert George to combat same-sex marriage was the “’common procreation’ rationale” which was the idea that marriage should strictly be heterosexual due to the ability to procreate (401). On December 13, 2010, Slate.com published an article called “The Best Argument Against Gay Marriage: And Why It Fails.” This article was a counterargument made by Kenji Yoshino, a New York University Law professor. In this article, Yoshino states that Robert George and his co-authors’ argument that gay marriage should be banned due to same-sex couples’ inability to procreate is invalid because it is statistically flawed and it makes unintentional attacks on certain groups of opposite-sex couples.

Corvino does not agree with the fact that marriage must be between a man and a women. There are flaws in Girgis, George, and Anderson’s argument of bodily union only occurring between a man and a women because they can reproduce. What would the status of a married couple be if the man or women became sterile? Would their sexual acts count as a bodily union or would they no longer be considered married because they cannot procreate? What would the status of a married couple be if the man or women became paralyzed and could not perform sexual acts? Would they still be married because they cannot achieve this bodily union at all? Girgis, George, and Anderson would reply that it is the intention of the act that would say they were a bodily union even if they could not perform this act or reproduce. Corvino finds serious flaws in this way of thinking because sterile or couples who cannot perform sexual acts look very similar to same-sex couples who can perform

The first summary of Andrew Sullivan’s essay is a reflection of Andrew Sullivan’s stance of the issue. The original essay was in favor of allowing same sex marriage in America. My summary will dictate some of the arguments that I found to be the most persuasive and important to Sullivan’s case. The second summary is of Bennett’s essay, Leave Marriage Alone. I will, again, try to point out the most influential pieces of argument in the essay.

John Corvino disputes in his article, Missing Staircases and the Marriage Debate: Is Same-Sex Marriage Bad For Children, that same-sex marriage is bad for children. He opens by stating that allowing gays to marry each other and give them equal rights and responsibilities benefits not only them, but also those around them. John also starts by setting aside two claims that he feels have little evidence, one that same-sex marriage produces children to grow up gay and second that children with gay or lesbian parents will be teased. He also admits that marriage does protect children, however it’s not the sole purpose of marriage. John then opens with an example about a widower, Walter, who decides to marry again at age 70. This new marriage will not produce any children and yet people still congratulate Walter and support the marriage. They congratulate Walter not because he will not produce out-of-wedlock children, but

When a man and a woman engage in unprotected sexual intercourse, the end result tends to be life, as a child is born nine months later. Only once a man’s sperm reaches the eggs of a woman is this possible. Clearly, life and the existence of the human species as a whole is the product of sex between a man and a woman. The norm of reproduction then, is the aforementioned union between man and woman in heterosexual intercourse. Heterosexuality is viewed as the norm of most societies. This norm creates controversy regarding homosexuality, as it [homosexualism] is considered deviant and against societal norms. The topic of homosexuality is important and worth further investigation because it is surrounded by controversial issues

The world has come very far with all the dramatic changes we have faced over the years. Wouldn’t you agree? As much change as the world has been through there are still numerous social problems that still exist in society today. Amongst those numerous social problems, sexual orientation and inequality stand out to me. Research from biology, psychology, and sociology is where our understanding of sexual orientation comes from. There are two hypothetical theories researchers have discovered examining the biological basis toward sexual orientation. One concept is the neurohormonal theory, biologist contend that homosexuality is caused by abnormal sex hormone levels in utero. The alternative theory is based on behavioral genetics, determining the source and magnitude of genetic impact on sexual orientation. This theory suggested the concept that gay men were genetically female. Later this theory was proven to be false. Homosexuality was considered as a pathology or mental illness. Not every psychologists agreed with that perspective. A researcher by the name of Havelock Ellis stated that homosexuality was congenital and for that reason it could not be considered as a disease. Sigmund Freud another theorist had the concept that everyone is born bisexual and that either homosexuality or heterosexuality is developed through social and personal experience. Ellis and Freud both concurred that homosexuality was not a mental illness. Despite these researchers’ opinions in 1973,

You’re going to have to be nice to your boss to be successful at the business. Disregarding your parents’ advice, you give time and compassion, later to discover there’s nothing different with African Americans. Again, to make a final decision over the morality of homosexuality, it is essential to eliminate all of one’s prejudices.

The realization of the homosexuality in the modern western world as a cultural, sexual and a social category has been a result of complex power relations that surround sexuality and gender. The acceptance of homosexuality in the society has met its fair share of resistance and skepticism. The view that homosexuality can be in the same league as heterosexual has led it to be viewed as a normal behavioral and moral standard (Gallagher & Baker, 2006). Inasmuch as the skeptics may not want to accept the existence of homosexuality studies show that the habit is rampant today with many gay people coming out in the open. Of interest is the political acceptance of homosexuality with passing gay rights so that it can be recognized by law. This move has given homosexuals the ability to engage in legal entities like marriage (Gallagher & Baker, 2006).