Should Gays Marry?
The essays by William Bennett and Andrew Sullivan are just the tip of the iceberg in the debate over homosexual marriage. This debate has been going on for years, with many solidly supported opinions on the topic. Both authors provide strong points and well written essays, and include some similar ideas, even though the message of each essay is contradictory to the other.
Andrew Sullivan’s essay, “Let Gays Marry,” is about how gays and lesbians have long been alienated from their basic rights as American citizens. He argues that allowing gays to marry will not drastically change the description of marriage as we know it, but will simply entitle same sex partners to devote themselves to each other, and declare their love for each other.
The Supreme Court made an influential ruling that “’a state cannot deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws.’”(25) Sullivan argues that that is just what America has been doing by not legally recognizing domestic partners of the same sex. He claims that “at some point in our lives, some of us are lucky enough to meet the person we truly love,” (25) gays included.
Sullivan recognizes that many religious organizations are against homosexuality, but this country has a separation of church and state that makes that argument arbitrary in terms of legality. He points out that the government gives out civil marriage licenses, and gays should not be left out of that.
Sullivan also states that the definition of marriage has been changed in the past. Women are no longer the property of their husbands, and interracial marriages are no longer taboo. He argues that allowing gays to marry would simply be another revision for the better, not a radical change in the institution.
Sullivan brings up the argument that marriage is for raising children, but many married couples have none. He lists as examples such people as the Doles and the Buchanans; two very conservative families.
The article by William Bennett, “Leave Marriage Alone,” is about how marriage is a sacred tradition. He believes that if you broaden the definition to include gays, that act will totally alter the purpose and meaning of marriage.
In Wade F. Horn’s article “Promoting Marriage as a Means of Promoting Fatherhood,” Horn discusses how having a child and being married is better for children because the father is more involved in the child’s life. Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas’s “Unmarried with Children,” on the other hand, takes the reader through Jen’s story about getting pregnant at a young age and deciding not to marry the father of her son. While both sources make appeals to emotion, reason, and character, Edin and Kefalas’s article makes more successful appeals and thus is the stronger argument.
In his essay, "Gay "Marriage": Societal Suicide", he argues that "Marriage is the traditional building block of human society, intended both to unite couples and bring children into the world"(Colson, pg. 535). He also states that "The family, led by a married mother and father, is the best available structure for both child rearing and cultural health" (Colson, Pg. 535). There is no doubt about this. A family with one mother and one father is the most ideal family structure. Unfortunately, this ideal doesn’t correlate really well into real life. There are millions of families in the United States made up of many different family structures. While they may not be the ideal structure, that doesn’t mean that they are not the best structure for the child. Colson is an idealist. Pollitt is a
During the 19th century the Canadian government established residential schools under the claim that Aboriginal culture is hindering them from becoming functional members of society. It was stated that the children will have a better chance of success once they have been Christianised and assimilated into the mainstream Canadian culture. (CBC, 2014) In the film Education as We See It, some Aboriginals were interviewed about their own experiences in residential schools. When examining the general topic of the film, conflict theory is the best paradigm that will assist in understanding the social implications of residential schools. The film can also be illustrated by many sociological concepts such as agents of socialization, class inequality, and language as a cultural realm.
Aboriginal people in Canada are the native peoples in North America within the boundaries of present-day Canada. In the 1880’s there was a start of residential schools which took Aboriginal kids from their family to schools to learn the Roman Catholics way of culture and not their own. In residential schools Aboriginal languages were forbidden in most operations of the school, Aboriginal ways were abolished and the Euro-Canadian manner was held out as superior. Aboriginal’s residential schools are careless, there were mental and physical abuse, Aboriginals losing their culture and the after effects of residential schools.
The Canadian and American governments designed a residential school system to assimilate Indigenous children into Western society by stripping them of their language, cultural practices as well as their traditions. By breaking these children’s ties to their families and communities, as well as forcing them to assimilate into Western society; residential schools were a root cause of many social problems, which even persist within Aboriginal communities today.
What is marriage? For thousands years, marriage has been a combination between a man and a woman. When they love each other, they decide to live together. That is marriage. But what will love happen between two same sex persons? Will they marry? Is their marriage acceptable? It is the argument between two authors: William J. Bennett and Andrew Sullivan. The two authors come from different countries and have different opinion about same sex marriage. Sullivan agrees with the gay marriage because of human right, on the other hand, Bennett contradicts his idea because he believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Even though their theories are totally different, their opinions are very well established.
The creation of the Residential Schools is now looked upon to be a regretful part of Canada’s past. The objective: to assimilate and to isolate First Nations and Aboriginal children so that they could be educated and integrated into Canadian society. However, under the image of morality, present day society views this assimilation as a deliberate form of cultural genocide. From the first school built in 1830 to the last one closed in 1996, Residential Schools were mandatory for First Nations or Aboriginal children and it was illegal for such children to attend any other educational institution. If there was any disobedience on the part of the parents, there would be monetary fines or in the worst case scenario, trouble with Indian Affairs.
Through an understanding of theoretical perspectives, and basic sociological concepts, the residential school system can be understood. The conflict theory correctly describes the residential education system, and it presents an accurate understanding of the destruction of Aboriginal culture. Socialization, culture, social inequality, and modern social theories all further explain the residential school system, and the effects it has on both the Europeans and the Aboriginals. Recognized now as a mistake, the use and removal of residential schools will forever be noted as a changing point in the struggle faced by the Aboriginal people of Canada.
In Sullivan’s article, Let Gays Marry, Sullivan tells of how the Supreme Court ruled about how gay and lesbians are no longer strangers in America. When asked the question why he wants the right to marry he answers that they want to marry for the same reason straight people do. He then begins to discus the definition of marriage, and how it has changed throughout time, as well as some other people’s definitions, and how they are flawed. He is not trying to change any religious doctrine; he just asks that the government give out civil marriage licenses to gays. After all, “there is a separation between church and state in this country” (pg. 26).
Residential schools were first established in the 1880's to solve Canada's “Indian Problem”. Settlers in Canada thought of the First Nations people as savages, and the goal of the residential schools was to civilize them and integrate them in to white Canadian society. The first operators of residential schools thought of their forced integration as a benefit to native peoples. One of the overseers of residential schools wrote to the Sisters in charge of St. Joseph's Mission at Williams Lake that “It now remains for ...
These residential schools have become mandatory. The Canadian government saw this was the only way to educate these people, and changing their way of life, by changing their religion, language ,and beliefs. The residential school’s main focus was to tech these native’s the English language and change their religion into the Christianity faith. The schools were run by church priest and nuns in almost every province in Canada from 1860-1884. By 1931 there were eight residential schools. The period of these credentials school lasted for sixty five years, up until the last residential school which was closed down in 1996. This ...
In school we are always taught about the lighter parts of Canadian History, but only until recently have Canadian students been taught about the darker parts of our history. Residential Schools were included in these dark parts of Canada’s history. In the 19th century, the Canadian government believed that Residential Schools were responsible for educating and caring for the country’s aboriginal people. The goal of these schools was to teach the aboriginal children about Christianity and Canadian customs, in hopes of them passing these practices on towards their own children and it would eventually be adopted into the aboriginal culture. The Canadian
Gay marriage is a hotly debated issue in today's society. Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett offer opposing views in the June 3, 1996 edition of Newsweek. Sullivan's article, “Let Gays Marry,” offers several arguments supporting the issues of same sex marriage. Bennett counters in his article, “Leave Marriage Alone,” that same sex marriages would be damaging to the sanctity of marriage. Each author presents several reasons for the positions they defend and bring up valid points to defend their opinions. William Bennett and Andrew Sullivan share a mutual respect for the values and sacredness of the bond of marriage. Their disagreements stem from who they believe should be allowed to marry.
A contradictory essay titled “Societal Suicide” by the authors Anne Morse and Charles Colson conveying that marriage ought to be realized as an old – fashioned and traditional way were people come together in holy matrimony when they said “traditional building block of human society.” Their essay continues to explicate the weary and unfair assumptions of marriage by concluding that there should only be the existence of man and woman relationships. The authors, due to gay couples overloaded with longing to marry one another, have also questioned marriage extinction. A question often asked is “How is it the end of marriage if same-sex couples marry?” Allowing gays to get married indorses marriage as well as supports the rights to care for every person. An...
The way society views same sex marriage can change. Throughout history, many beliefs have changed. In the past, black people were not considered as citizens in the constitution. It is not until the thirteenth amendment in 1865 that slavery was banned. Women were not considered equal to men and were not given the right to vote until 1920 when congress passed the fourteenth amendment. It takes time but opinions and beliefs can change and the past has shown us that is indeed possible! Same sex marriage are nothing more than the union of two humans being that care, love, and want to make commitments to each other. That commitment can not be recognized unless same sex marriage is legalized.