Length: 833 words (3 pages)
Rating: Red (FREE)      
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

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. Bennett also discusses whether or not allowing gays to marry will open the door for more radical ideas, such as polygamy or incest.

Bennett believes that gay marriage would weaken the institution. He thinks that by legally recognizing same sex unions, we will be sending mixed signals to the young both about acceptable behavior as well as sexuality. According to Bennett, it would also ?obscure marriage?s enormously consequential function -- procreation and child-rearing.?(29) He argues that allowing gays to marry would go against every major religion of the world.

Bennett wants to know why Andrew Sullivan feels his cause is worthy, but not that of a bisexual who wishes for polygamy, or of a father who wants to marry his daughter. He believes that by changing the definition of marriage to include homosexuals, it would open the floodgates for all kinds of deviant behavior. He also questions the fidelity of homosexual males. Bennett realizes that not all married couples are faithful, but he quotes Sullivan as having been opposed to the idea of having to give up the ??openness of the contract,??(30) referring to homosexual relationships.

Bennett believes that marriage is not an ?arbitrary construct which can be redefined simply by those who lay claim to it,? (30) but rather it is ?an honorable estate?built on moral, religious, sexual and human realities.?(30) He claims that marriage is ?based on a natural teleology, on the different, complimentary nature of men and women.?(30) This is only one of many topics that both authors discuss.

There are several similarities between the two essays, despite the conflicting viewpoints. Both authors discuss the definition of marriage, which, to some, is a union between a man and a woman. Sullivan and Bennett also discuss the ramifications of broadening the definition of marriage to include gays.

Each essay discusses several different definitions of marriage. One idea is that marriage is a dedication of love, and another is that marriage is a union based on raising children.

Both bring up the fact that people generally frown upon homosexuality, mostly from religious viewpoints. It is also recognized in each essay that our current society is built on the idea that marriage is between a man and a woman. In addition, both authors point out that a change to include gays could cause the individuals who practice less desirable lifestyles to demand that they be included in the new definition of marriage. Some examples which surface are that of polygamy, as well as incest.

While both of these men present arguments representing different sides of the spectrum, they share many points throughout their essays. The similarities make it difficult for many people to choose a side. This debate has lasted a long time, and probably will, because there are many strong arguments no matter what your opinion is.