Same Sex Marriage Essay Example
Part A
In “Is It Wrong to Discriminate on the Basis of Homosexuality?” Jeff Jordan defends a ban on two main arguments that aim to justify discrimination against homosexuals, in the case of same-sex marriage. In his first argument, Jordan asserts his argument from conflicting claims in an attempt to resolve the ongoing public dilemma about same-sex marriage by accommodation. In the second argument, Jordan introduces the “no-exit” argument. This utilizes the principle that citizens must support a practice that they find morally or religiously acceptable. Jordan never addresses the claim about the moral status of homosexuality in and of itself, but argues that, "The moral impasse generated by conflicting views concerning homosexuality, and the public policy ramifications of those conflicting views justify the claim that it is morally permissible, in certain circumstances, to discriminate against homosexuals." (237) The issue stems from the question Jordan asks saying, “Does homosexuality have the same moral status as heterosexuality?” (237) According to “Is It Wrong to Discriminate on the Basis of Homosexuality?”, “ The parity thesis contends that homosexuality has the same moral status as heterosexuality.” (237) Even though I am against same-sex marriage, I agree with the parity thesis that it is wrong to discriminate against homosexuals solely based on sexual orientation. Jordan then proceeds to define the term “difference thesis”. “The difference thesis entails that there are situations in which it is normally permissible to discriminate against homosexuals.” (Jordan 237) I do not agree that there is ever a time when someone should be judged based on his or her sexuality. As a follower of Christ, we are instructed to “judge not” in Luke 6:37 in the Bible. Premise one states, “Homosexual acts between consenting adults harm no one.” (Jordan 238) This would be true if the act was done in private. If two individuals want to participate in this
In “Is It Wrong to Discriminate on the Basis of Homosexuality?” Jeff Jordan defends a ban on two main arguments that aim to justify discrimination against homosexuals, in the case of same-sex marriage. In his first argument, Jordan asserts his argument from conflicting claims in an attempt to resolve the ongoing public dilemma about same-sex marriage by accommodation. In the second argument, Jordan introduces the “no-exit” argument. This utilizes the principle that citizens must support a practice that they find morally or religiously acceptable. Jordan never addresses the claim about the moral status of homosexuality in and of itself, but argues that, "The moral impasse generated by conflicting views concerning homosexuality, and the public policy ramifications of those conflicting views justify the claim that it is morally permissible, in certain circumstances, to discriminate against homosexuals." (237) The issue stems from the question Jordan asks saying, “Does homosexuality have the same moral status as heterosexuality?” (237) According to “Is It Wrong to Discriminate on the Basis of Homosexuality?”, “ The parity thesis contends that homosexuality has the same moral status as heterosexuality.” (237) Even though I am against same-sex marriage, I agree with the parity thesis that it is wrong to discriminate against homosexuals solely based on sexual orientation. Jordan then proceeds to define the term “difference thesis”. “The difference thesis entails that there are situations in which it is normally permissible to discriminate against homosexuals.” (Jordan 237) I do not agree that there is ever a time when someone should be judged based on his or her sexuality. As a follower of Christ, we are instructed to “judge not” in Luke 6:37 in the Bible. Premise one states, “Homosexual acts between consenting adults harm no one.” (Jordan 238) This would be true if the act was done in private. If two individuals want to participate in this