Legalizing Homosexual Marriage: Your Preference is not my Business
PHI 103: Informal Logic
December 14, 2009
The rights we all share today are guaranteed to us by the US Constitution. Over the years some rights have been challenged due to opinion rather the facts. The issue of homosexual rights has been ongoing for years; not for any special privileges just to have the same rights and respect as heterosexuals. The topic of homosexual marriage has become a big issue for modern times and arguments are being made that have no solid reasoning or evidence. People get worked up, get emotional and think that just because they speak louder or use euphemisms, rhetoric and other persuasive tool makes the argument valid. Arguments on such a controversial topic have many ways to be supported that make them strong, valid, and or sound by distinguishing argument from explanation and opinion, have a conclusion that follows the validity from the premise, and to have an objective set of set of rational standard. Homosexual marriage should be legalized because the basic rights to have an official relationship with the person you love should not be denied or dictated under the legislation of government. Many argue for and against legalizing homosexual marriage; however, the critical thinking tools which allows them to make sound arguments are lacking. I agree that homosexual marriage should be legalized, mainly because something like the basic right to have an official relationship with someone you love should not be denied or dictated under the rules of government. There are arguments being made both for and against legalizing homosexual marriage however some lack the critical thinking tools to make strong, sound, or valid arguments. I believe that homosexuals should have the right to marry based on the premise that the constitution has put into place laws that guarantee equal rights, that one religion should not have precedence on such an issue, and that it is none of our (the government/ American people) right have a say in personal relationships as long as it is not harmful to others. It is just none of our business, and everyone is entitled to happiness and equality. Within this paper I will explore these claims both supporting and in opposition and the critical thinking tools that either make a strong or weak argument. America is the land of the free which gives each legal citizen the right of privacy freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to justice, and the pursuit of happiness. However when the controversial topic of homosexual marriage arises such arguments are made: marriage is an institution between one man and one women, marriage is for procreation, same sex couples are not the ideal environment to raise children, gay relationships are immoral and violate the sacred institution of marriage, marriage is traditionally a heterosexual institution, same sex marriage is an untried social experiment, same sex marriage would open Pandora’s box to suggestions of legalizing incest, polygamy, bestial marriage, ect. This list could go on and on with arguments to why or why not homosexual marriage should be legalized. The definition of marriage as defined by Webster 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. This is the traditional definition but with the changing times there is now a second definition defining marriage as: the states of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage. With this being true than this is a good deductive argument or a valid argument “whose premises being true would mean necessarily that the conclusion is true”. (Parker and Moore P. 12) Webster also defines marriage as being united to a person of...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document