The argumentative paper highlights the main concepts of debates regarding same sex marriage. It relates to moral and political considerations alike. Using the Toulmin model, below the paper will be investigated based on the six levels of argument.
- Claim. The main point of the argument is that while civil marriage is different from the one that is held at church, politicians still do not provide equal opportunities for homosexuals, giving way to discrimination in the society. The author concludes that “opportunities should be given to everyone”. (p. 476.)
- Support. The author claims that restricting access to same opportunities based on moral considerations is wrong. He claims that “Even if the majority decides that sex outside of marriage is bad – and even if they are right – it would be wrong to withhold drivers’ licenses from those who have pre-marital or extra-marital sex.” (p. 477.)
3. Warrant. The argument states that being homosexual is not a “good reason to withhold an opportunity” and people who marry do not create unacceptable risk of hard for the rest of the society.
4. Backing. The economic argument against same sex marriage, which states that these couples do not deserve the transfer of resources is also covered. It is found that even if the economic implications were not present, people arguing the point would still be against the approval of the institution. Further, the study concludes that the claims that confirm that same-sex couples would be worse parents than traditional married or cohabiting spouses is not based on facts and statistics.
5. Rebuttal. The author argues that the reason why many people do not consider same sex marriage as a tool to provide equal opportunities is because “many opportunities involve only a single person”(p. 482.). Likewise, he argues that moral arguments are not valid, as many Catholics believe that divorce is not moral, the law still allows people to legally separate. While some claim that same-sex marriage would undermine traditional marriage, it is proven that the number of marriages already decline while the number of co-habiting couples increases.
6. Qualifier. The statistics stated show the society’s real views about homosexuality. The author states that “Polls show that about three-quarters of all Americans oppose the criminalization of homosexual sex acts”. (p. 485.) Therefore, if there is no proof that the institution would cause damage to the society’s values, the economy, there should not be a valid argument. Excluding people based on their sexual orientation -simply put- is discrimination.
Rajczi, Alex. “A Populist Argument for Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage.” The Monist 91.3 (2008): 475-505. ProQuest Research Library. Web. 8 Dec. 2011.