Essay on Compare and Contrast Two Views of Gay Marriage

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.

The article “Gay Marriage and Religious Rights: Say Nada to FADA” was written by Walter Olson in 2015. Olson is known for his writings about the American legal system and his liberitarian thinking. The passage presents the controversy between same-sex marriage and religious liberty. In June 2015, the United States Supreme Court announced the legalization of homosexual marriage. In September 2015, a bill that presented the conflict declared the importance of preventing any gouvernmental interference which emphasizses the convictions related to marriage and religious beliefs.

Marriage has always been the combination of a man and a woman. The function of marriage cannot change easily as the Bennett states “the function of marriage is not elastic; the institution is already fragile enough” (177). It confused me. In my opinion, everything can change no matter how long it is. If William believes that it is true, I think there were not many revolutions in the past to change the world and we cannot live in a modern world today without those revolutions. For instance, women did not have the right to study, to have a job in the past; they did not have the right to vote, to do what their spouse and their sons can do. Who knows in the future they may have the same right as men. They change everyone’s opinion about women. Who knows in the next 100 years, people will consider gay as a normal person and they will have the right to marry. If what the author said is true, I think this world cannot develop because in philosophy, they believe that the consequence of the developed world is the change. When it’s changed, it will be a higher level of civilization. So I think Bennett is wrong at this point. We all know that a gay person cannot have children because of their same biological construct. But what will happen if a gay family has children? Will they be able to live like the normal family when they have two dads or two moms? “That it is far better for a child to be raised by a mother and a father than by,

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)

One of the instances where Sullivan incorrectly supports his thesis reads, “The heterosexuality of marriage is intrinsic only if it is understood to be intrinsically procreative; but that definition has long been abandoned in Western society,” (30). Sullivan does not accurately depict the consensus on gay marriage in the West. In reality, a measly forty-nine percent of Americans support the wedding of homosexuals, according to a Pew Research Center Poll. He also fails to explain the connections between homophobia, religion, and conservatism. Instead of expanding on this, the author narrates as if his opinion surpasses all others’ through phrases such as “it should” (30), “Burkean conservatives should,” (32), and “the only reform that truly matters” (33).

In the reading, “Here Comes the Groom," the author, Andrew Sullivan argues that the legalization of gay marriage is both a liberal and conservative cause

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.

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.

Gay marriage is not the only issue that is being discussed throughout America involving the gay community. In a particular study done by USA Today, results showed that when Americans were asked if they think homosexual relationships between consenting adults should be legal, 46% answered yes (“USA Today” 6). However, when asked if they would then favor a law that would allow homosexuals to get married, only 24% were in favor (6). This survey also showed the differences of peoples’ ideas based on if they attended church or not (6). The results showed that 73% of Americans who attend church weekly oppose the legalization of gay marriage and only 38% of those who don’t attend church oppose legalization (6). These results show that for many Americans, marriage is a religious agreement, but for many others, marriage is a right that should be given to all who want to partake in it.

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.

Recently, people have been arguing with respect to the definition of marriage. To get married is a very important event for almost everyone. Particularly for women, marriage and giving a birth could be the two major events of their lives. Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett are authors who are arguing about homosexual marriage. Sullivan believes in same-sex marriage because he thinks everyone has a right to marry. On the other hand, Bennett speaks out against Sullivan’s opinion. Bennett makes a claim that marriage is between a man and a woman structuring their entire life together. Both authors’ opinions differ on same-sex marriage. Nevertheless, their ideas are well recognized.

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.

In my personal opinion, I believe that the argument Sullivan presents outweighs the opposing arguments discussed in Kurtz article. My belief derives from the fact that Sullivan’s article shows the perspective of how a homosexual person might feel when concerning the issues on allowing the LGBTQ+ community to participate in committing marriages. Sullivan makes a variety of fine points on why homosexuals should be allowed to marry, just as heterosexuals are given the privilege, when he states the it isn’t even about gay marriage but about marriage as a whole. Marriage should signify only for what people perceive as the “norm” but for the allowance of letting two people who have fallen in love come together in a beautiful ceremony that showcases

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

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