William Bennett's Against Gay Marriage

One of the biggest controversial worldwide issue is gay marriage. The definition of marriage according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law. Being able to stand firm to my viewpoint in this generation is very hard and totally biased against same sex marriage or just simply homosexual relationships in general because everyone wants to accept everything that gives one satisfying pleasure. As a christian, to me same sex marriage is wrong. In my opinion, marriage is a holy and sacred matrimony created by God, joining a male and female in the eyes of God to make a commitment . Another purpose of marriage, is to create a family in the traditional way which includes reproducing. Many argue that same sex marriage is a right, but they

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

“Marriage and Love”, a short essay by Emma Goldman, gives a wonderful argument regarding love and marriage, in fact, she nails it. Marriage does not equal love or has anything nothing to do with it. Not only that, but the marriage could also easily kill whatever relationship was there prior to the declaration. Marriage is simply a social construct, one that imposes control by religion, tradition, and social opinion (Goldman 304). However, if marriage is such the ball and chain that we all joke about, then why do people get married?

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).

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.

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,

In his paper “Against Gay Marriage”, William J. Bennett uses quotes from a multitude of sources to support the argument that he is making, such as when he is commenting on the effects of the recent Hawaii Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. Bennett uses outside evidence to support major points such as his opposition to schools accepting homosexuals and teaching that homosexuality is equal. While most prolific in the second half of the argument, William J. Bennett uses both minor quotes and more important quotations of outside evidence to support his argument; however, Bennet does so in an unskilled manner. In several circumstances he uses uncited evidence from unnamed people, and he also quotes minor words with an unknown motive for doing so. The unclear motive for quoting minor words could be considered

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

I also learned about the the different perceptions on marriage having to do with monogamy versus polygamy. Coontz tells of a tradition in parts of Asia where: “A woman may be married to two or more brothers, all of whom share sexual access to her” (257). This shows a clearly polygamous relationship, whereas Bennett’s essay shows he is against polygamy and believes it marriage should only be two people. He says, “How could they explain why we ought to deny a marriage licence to a bisexual who wants to marry two people,” (272). This is very different from today’s perception of marriage as currently it is between only two people, and polygamous

He states his contempt for these views and states a detailed reason why gay marriage makes sense. He makes it known that he feels that gay marriage should be viewed as normal and gay marriage should be held to a similar standard. He feels that this union would help in domesticating men and make them reliable caregivers. In his article, he concludes by articulating that he is gay and would be ashamed if other homosexual individuals would not push for their right to marry (Rauch, p. 23).

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)

Over the years in our country’s history it has been apparent that the idea of same sex marriages is becoming much more popular, however in most states there is still one thing stopping them. That one thing stopping two people from the pursuit of happiness which they desire is a social injustice. Social injustices are situations where a person or group of people is treated unfairly due to certain factors for example discrimination, prejudice, racism, heterosexism, sexism, and so forth. In the case of same sex marriages, the factor playing a major role in this social injustice is where most people believe that opposite sexes attract, but in the case of a same sex couple wanting to be married, this brings about many topics to be discussed by

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