Does Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Hurt Traditional Marriage?: Analysis of a Yes Argument

In the past few decades, the question of allowing for same-sex marriage is a recurring topic of controversy. In the houses of same-sex couples, the need for equal rights is of great importance. Currently, many states ban the marriage of same-sex couples and do not view a marriage between same-sex couples as an official marriage. These states hold their claim by saying that the Constitution defines a marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Therefore, according to the definition stated by the Constitution, the marriage of a man and a man or a woman and a woman is unconstitutional. Anti-gay supporters view same-sex couples as unnatural and improper. As of the issue date of this article, the Supreme Court had not made a national decision on same-sex marriage and the benefits entitled to that marriage. This CQ Researcher journal focuses on the topic of same-sex marriage. It appeared in the CQ Researcher publication on March 14, 2013: volume 23, issue 11, and is appropriately titled “Gay Marriage.” This article shows the years of debate over same-sex marriage and examples of people affected by the current ban. CQ Researcher explores the laws set by governments to prevent same-sex marriage and the efforts made by same-sex couples to getting rid of these laws. Then, for a Pro/Con debate, CQ Researcher asked Robert P. George, Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, “Does legalizing same-sex marriage hurt traditional marriage?” Overall, George did not give a very strong or persuasive argument in support of same-sex marriage hurting the traditional form of marriage.

George states that nature makes sure that a child will have a mother, but nature does not guarantee a father figure. Marriage is a cultural norm for regular...

... middle of paper ...

...r argument. In order to win over the vote of someone on the opposite side of the controversy, enough evidence is needed to prove that one side is superior over the other.

Overall, George did not give a very strong and persuasive argument in support of same-sex marriage hurting the traditional form of marriage. His reasoning for supporting his side of the debate was a sensible reason; however, George lacked the appropriate usage of evidence to win the vote of his audience. In addition to his lack of evidence, George used methods of propaganda to manipulate the audience. Using methods of propaganda in an effort to win an argument is not proper because it is essentially lying to the audience to get a certain opinion. Had he used strong evidence and dropped his methods of manipulation, his argument would have been more effective in influencing his audience’s opinion.