So if it is acceptable to argue that unpopular sexual minorities have no right to equal protection of the law because they can avoid disadvantage or persecution by voluntarily changing the choice they have presumably made, then it is equally true that the First Amendment should not include protection for choice in religion, because no rational person could argue that religious belief is itself not a choice.
Everyone has their own ways of expressing their feelings for others. Among those "ten arguments," the slippery-slope fallacy often more than one can be seen clearly in every one of the ten. And because it is, the strategy is often used to put a gay-marriage initiative on the ballot when interest in an election important to the right is otherwise flagging.
Just like people of the straight society, they are no different and deserve the same rights as everyone else. Australia passing same-sex marriage into law was a blow for all decent people. For married couples, it is a given that one parent or both can simply get on an airplane and take their child to another state if they wish.
It is disputed that by allowing same sex couples to marry would also allow Why not recognize the hypocrisy - that there is no sound moral ground on which to support the notion of worshipfully traditional heterosexual marriage while freely allowing its destruction through divorce?
Yet it is easily the weakest. Make sure you back up your reasons with plausible evidence, anecdotes, or appeals to emotion. Seems to me that gays would be doing the world a favor by not bringing more hungry mouths into an already overburdened world. In the first place, no one is proposing the alteration of heterosexual marriage at all.
Even if you are permanently parenting the child. To get the current bibliography on gay marriage from Amazon. These are all civil rights issues that have nothing whatever to do with the ecclesiastical origins of marriage; they are matters that have become enshrined in state and federal laws over the years in many ways that exclude us from the rights that legally married couples enjoy and consider their constitutional right.
The thought of gay sex is repulsive. The last of the top three arguments is that same-sex partnerships are short-lived and non-monogamous, therefore, gays and lesbians should not be allowed to marry.
President Bush and the Pope have both come out publicly against the sanction of same-sex unions. The American critics of same-sex marriage betray their provincialism with this argument. Report Story Is it our right to deny a right? A persuasive essay that I did for my Grade 8 Language Arts class.
A classic example of the reductio ad absurdum fallacy, it is calculated to instill fear in the mind of anyone hearing the argument. The Southern Poverty Law Center maintains a "hate group" watch on many of these groups.
There is only one truth that people should never forget: Not only that, but depending on the state or even the city hospitals will or will not allow someone to visit their same sex partner when visits are restricted to family only; nor will they let them make decisions for their partners medical treatment.
The case in Florida is a perfect example of such benefits that are denied. The concept of not denying people their rights unless you can show a compelling reason to do so is the very basis of the American ideal of human rights. If one believes in religious freedom, the recognition that opposition to gay marriage is based on religious arguments is reason enough to discount this argument.
Gay marriage would undermine sodomy laws.
Same sex marriage does no harm to society. The most simple answer is to appeal to conservative values. This is something that few heterosexuals can understand unless they are a minority themselves. And gays do have such relationships!
That particular Buddhist sect claims many more members in Hawaii than does the Mormon church. If the ten percent of all the human race that is gay were to suddenly refrain from procreation, I think it is safe to say that the world would probably be better off.The Gay Marriage Debate - Within this essay, the main focus will be to develop a thorough analysis and discussion in relation to the topic of gay marriage.
Jul 12, · Gay marriage should be legalized because it is uncivilized and unmerited. Our civil rights and the Constitution give us many liberties. One of our civil liberties is the pursuit of happiness. Gay marriage persuasive essay Gay Marriage in the United States The debate between whether gay marriage should be legalized or not has been a controversial topic recently.
In the past twelve years, equal marriage rights have been legalized in 6 states of the U.S. Eighteen states do not. An essay on why the arguments against gay marriage don't hold up in the light of reason. Apr 20, · Original Work: Persuasive Speech/Essay for Same-Sex Marriage.
A/N: A persuasive essay that I did for my Grade 8 Language Arts class. I liked it and I ended up getting an A on it, so I thought I’d post it here. Read story Pro Gay Marriage Essay by Kuryenenburysevern (Jordayyniseffinamazing) with 8, mint-body.com it our right to deny a right?
You could ask anyone and sev Reviews: 8.Download