In Andrew Sullivan’s article. “ For Gay Marriage” . he is a adult male on a mission. He appears to be so to the full committed to democratic values that he seeks to widen equal rights in matrimony to homophiles.
And he makes an admirable instance for equality and self-respect for all people. including homophiles. However. he could do an even stronger instance by mentioning more surveies and adept sentiments. Although Sullivan’s significance is good taken by sympathetic readers.
the fact is that he could get the better of much of the ambiguity of his presentation by mentioning more concrete surveies. including long-run surveies. which support his cardinal points. For illustration.
when he makes the averment that “ in some ways the matrimony issue is precisely parallel to the military” ( 283 ) . it is ill-defined precisely what he means. Is he mentioning to prejudice against homosexual soldiers? On the other manus. is he mentioning to a common demand of selflessness? The reply is merely non clear because Sullivan ne’er cites any surveies of the job he has in head. An even more of import point for Sullivan concerns child-rearing. He asserts.
one may state right if he already portions Sullivan’s sentiment. that kids raised by homosexual spouses are every bit good adjusted as kids raised by traditional. heterosexual parents. This would be a perfect chance for Sullivan to mention several well-conducted. long-run surveies which bear out his position. But does he take the chance? Does he mention any surveies? No.
non one. Another cardinal point for Sullivan concerns the comparative importance of legalising cheery matrimony. He asserts that “ if nil else were done at all. and cheery matrimony were legalized. 90 % of the political work necessary to accomplish homosexual and sapphic equality would hold been achieved” ( 285 ) .
But. Sullivan ne’er explains where he gets the figure 90 % . He could explicate if this is the adept sentiment of any recognized authorization. Still another cardinal premise in Sullivan’s article is that holding cheery matrimony legalized would give homophiles greater hope about the hereafter.
He says. “ It provides function theoretical accounts for immature homosexual people. who after the excitement of coming out can easy sink into short-run relationships and insecurity with no touchable end in sight” ( 285 ) . Here once more.
it would be helpful to hold mentions to several important surveies or adept sentiments. but these are singularly missing. In seeking to legalise cheery matrimony. Sullivan promotes equality and self-respect for all people. and particularly homophiles. As it stands.
his article is admirable and congratulations worthy. And I believe his premises may be right. However. without careful certification and commendation of experts and well-thought-of surveies. he comes across as sermon to the choir.
Those who are in favour will go on to be in favour. but those who are non will go on to be opposed. Equally good as the article is. supplying more commendations of surveies and adept sentiments would raise this article to another degree of lucidity. This could be the difference in winning over the conservativists Sullivan seeks to carry.
Plants CitedSullivan. Andrew “ For Gay Marriage. ” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. Tenth Edition. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen.
NY. : Pearson Longman. 2008. 282-286
