Traditional Marriage vs Nontraditional Marriage
Traditional Marriage vs Nontraditional Marriage
PHI103: Informal Logic
Instructor: Kent Burstein
Marriage equality has been a topic of hot discussion for a few years now. With more and more people coming out as homosexual or bisexual, the topic of whether or not these individuals should be allowed to get married has become a hot-button issue. Marriage goes back a very long ways in history, and has only been known to be a sacred union between a man and a woman. The idea for marriage equality is to give homosexual individuals the same rights that have been given in marriage to heterosexual individuals.
Ryan Anderson, in his article ‘In Defense of Traditional Marriage’, explains that marriage between a man and a woman is best for procreative love, childbearing, and childrearing (Anderson, 2013). He settles behind the idea that giving into gay marriage will cause a break-down in traditional marriage. There is the idea that if we weaken the structure and integrity of what marriage truly means, we are more likely to abandon what marriage is altogether and be able to take on multiple partnerships of either gender. He does not bring religion into the conversation or call homosexuality a blasphemous institution. Marriage equality does not make sense to Anderson as he claims that “ample social science has shown [that] children tend to do best when reared by their mother and father” (Anderson, 2013).
Anderson’s argument starts out as making a fair bit of sense. There is not illegality to gay marriage; there are allowed to be ordained ministers who can perform a religious ceremony to give the individuals a union, gay individuals are allowed to live together and have relationships. However, the government does not recognize this as a traditional marriage (i.e. sacred union between a man and a woman). Anderson’s deductive argument begins as a sound argument, but quickly devolves into a relentless argument about how gay marriage will affect the sanctity of marriage as it
PHI103: Informal Logic
Instructor: Kent Burstein
Marriage equality has been a topic of hot discussion for a few years now. With more and more people coming out as homosexual or bisexual, the topic of whether or not these individuals should be allowed to get married has become a hot-button issue. Marriage goes back a very long ways in history, and has only been known to be a sacred union between a man and a woman. The idea for marriage equality is to give homosexual individuals the same rights that have been given in marriage to heterosexual individuals.
Ryan Anderson, in his article ‘In Defense of Traditional Marriage’, explains that marriage between a man and a woman is best for procreative love, childbearing, and childrearing (Anderson, 2013). He settles behind the idea that giving into gay marriage will cause a break-down in traditional marriage. There is the idea that if we weaken the structure and integrity of what marriage truly means, we are more likely to abandon what marriage is altogether and be able to take on multiple partnerships of either gender. He does not bring religion into the conversation or call homosexuality a blasphemous institution. Marriage equality does not make sense to Anderson as he claims that “ample social science has shown [that] children tend to do best when reared by their mother and father” (Anderson, 2013).
Anderson’s argument starts out as making a fair bit of sense. There is not illegality to gay marriage; there are allowed to be ordained ministers who can perform a religious ceremony to give the individuals a union, gay individuals are allowed to live together and have relationships. However, the government does not recognize this as a traditional marriage (i.e. sacred union between a man and a woman). Anderson’s deductive argument begins as a sound argument, but quickly devolves into a relentless argument about how gay marriage will affect the sanctity of marriage as it