Critique Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Critique - Essay Example Homosexual marriages cannot be justified without drawing help from logical fallacies and making broad generalizations. Summary of the Article 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 a torture for the homosexual people whereas legalization of gay marriage would provide the 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 unfavorable impacts on the children’s psychology, Homosexual marriages have existed throughout the history in forms different from the traditional marriage. Dating, love, and rel ationship; 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. ... ls by excessively making use of such emotional words as â€Å"most public affront possible† (Sullivan 404) and calling the traditional form of marriage between a man and a woman a â€Å"circular fiet† (Sullivan 404). While referring to marriage as a public contract, Sullivan has just highlighted one aspect of marriage i.e. â€Å"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 the heterosexual marriage to its understanding as intrinsically procreative. Sullivan has a preconceived no tion 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 like 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 favor of heterosexual marriage does not do so because he/she disparages the 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 its positive impacts on the society.