Anderman's Argumentative Analysis

854 Words2 Pages

The battle for equal marriage and parenting rights for homosexual couples has been a contentious one largely due to the concerns of dissidents questioning the naturality of sexual relations between members of the same sex. One of the prevailing arguments cited for opposing same sex relationships is the notion that homosexual sex is unnatural and thus immoral because procreation is not a possible result of homosexual sex. Ryan Anderman, spokesman for the Family Policy Institute, argues that “the state must strive to limit” same sex relationships due to their abnormality and lack of morals. However, while Anderman makes several claims in an effort to delegitimize sex between same sex couples, he fails to realize both that his criteria for the morality of a sexual act would include groups of heterosexual people who cannot reproduce, yet partake in sex for reasons beyond procreation, as well as that making homosexual sex illegal on the grounds that it is non-procreative …show more content…

It is assumed that sex was designed by nature exclusively for the purpose of procreation: partaking in sex for anything outside of its “natural intent” is deemed immoral. However, although heterosexual couples frequently engage in sexual activity for reasons other than procreation, one can assume that Anderman amends his argument by pointing out that procreation is a possibility of heterosexual sex, whereas it is impossible in homosexual sex. He continues to assert that not only is any act that cannot produce offspring immoral, but that the state has an interest in preventing these acts from occurring. Consequently, this definition of morality opens a variety of questions concerning non-homosexual groups that fall under the umbrella of sex acts that hold no possibility of

Open Document