Legalization of Homosexual Marriage - Essay Example

In his article, Sullivan argues that gay marriage is eligible for legalization by all means. Marriage is a social contract. Marriage is a physical and emotional bond between two people irrespective of their gender. People, who have been denied to fall in love with somebody despite the natural love they feel can best understand how it feels when a gay is denied the right to get married. Illegalizing gay marriage is torture for homosexual people whereas legalization of gay marriage would provide homosexual people with grounds to have normal relationships with their parents and loved ones rather than being socially outcast. Gay parenting does not have any unfavourable impacts on children’s psychology, Homosexual marriages have existed throughout history in forms different from traditional marriage. Dating, love, and relationship; everything becomes meaningless for them when they cannot get married. Without marriage, there is no commitment. Homosexuality occurs naturally, and this challenges all conservative reasons against the legalization of gay marriage. Therefore, gay marriage should be legalized.

Sullivan’s article has various logical fallacies. Sullivan has attacked the integrity of the churches by saying, “I am not here discussing what churches do in their private affairs” (Sullivan 404). Sullivan has attempted to hide the consequences of extending the allowance of the marriage contract to the homosexuals by excessively making use of such emotional words as “most public affront possible” (Sullivan 404) and calling the traditional form of marriage between a man and a woman a “circular file” (Sullivan 404). While referring to marriage as a public contract, Sullivan has just highlighted one aspect of marriage i.e. “bond between two people” thus excluding all others who are affected by the marriage between the two people that include but are not limited to their parents, and their own children. Marriage is not just about two people, it has its implications on other members of the family, as well as upon the nation as a whole that might be already suffering from a negative population growth rate, and homosexual marriages are definitely going to aggravate this social problem. Sullivan has made a logical fallacy by limiting the intrinsic status of heterosexual marriage to its understanding as intrinsically procreative. Sullivan has a preconceived notion that a marriage between an adult and a minor is unsustainable as one of the two parties does not understand the contract. If an adult and a minor marry each other with mutual consent, Sullivan should acknowledge that as an emotional bond too just as he approves of the emotional bond between two homosexuals. Sullivan has made broad generalizations that are unfair. For example, he says that everybody who speaks in favour of heterosexual marriage does not do so because he/she disparages homosexual marriage, but because not doing so means demanding human virtue in excess. I don’t believe that this is the reason why people support heterosexual marriages. People support heterosexual marriages primarily because of their religious beliefs, and then because of considering their positive impacts on society. Likewise, Sullivan has overlooked all the studies that have to date identified the negative effects of gay parenting on child psychology by saying, “There is no evidence that shows any deleterious impact…” (Sullivan 406). There is excessive use of emotionally loaded terms in support of homosexual marriages in the article including, “profoundly humanizing” and “traditionalizing”.

Concluding, Sullivan’s article is full of logical fallacies. Although his general approach i.e. justifying homosexual marriage by evaluating it on the legal, social, and cultural scales established for heterosexual marriage, yet in the process of doing this, he has made broad generalizations, made excessive use of emotions to convince the audiences, and occasionally attacked or challenged the integrity of the institutions favouring heterosexual marriages. I disagree with Sullivan that homosexual marriage is comparable to heterosexual marriage on all levels.