His rebuttal made a valid point that lead you to question the sanctity of marriage. Pointing out arranged marriages, Keith Olberman, pushed the envelope even further by questioning the love and respect that we have for one another. As Olbermann’s argument came to a close, he “de-fined” marriage, by pulling the religion card right from under Proposition Eight’s nose. He continued to press the meaning of love and the meaning of why we are alive. He questioned the religious aspects of what is considered to be wrong, to mortality for what is
Heterosexuals have gay kids, so homosexuals have just as much chance as heterosexuals of having a gay child. When asked if Rosie would rather her children to be gay or straight, she answered straight. Rosie didn't want her kids to be gay in America because all the madness that comes with that title, and she believed it would just be easier if they were straight. In the end she just wants her children to live a happy life. Rosie said being gay does not make someone a bad parent.
Sullivan says that minors and close family members should not be given the right to marry because minors are unable to understand such a commitment. The marriage of close family members creates incest, which threatens the trust and responsibility the family needs to survive. Sullivan asks if homosexuals fall in the same categories. Sullivan says that “domestic partnership,” a conservative concept, is one of the strongest arguments for gay marriage. Domestic partnerships qualify for benefits previously reserved for heterosexual married couples.
He uses a bisexual who wants to marry two people as a possible example. He does not view upholding marriage to only include a man and a woman as a put down to others. Instead see it as an acknowledgement and celebration of marriage. Bennett feels it is not intolerant to view heterosexual marriage and same sex marriage as different, because “..making distinctions in the law is necessary to relationships that are distinct.” Bennett then moves to social concerns that allowing same sex marriage could cause confusion in children, promote promiscuity, and force the law to allow adoptions that could be detrimental. Bennett closes his article citing the sexual revolution and out of wedlock births as some examples of negative effects on marriage.
Another prospect is that in the lack of discrimination gender differences can appear. Men and women are clearly different from birth, but their differences in interests, talents, attitudes whether arising from birth or learning all plays a part in the big story. Pinker’s third thought behind women’s absence is the child-rearing idea. Women, who embrace most of the responsibility when it comes to raising children, cannot simply coexist with professions in the science field which are so demanding in time. Pinker concludes his commentary with psychologist Philip Tetlock’s argument dealing with taboo.
This could mean in cases where the mother could look after the child comfortably with love and care but chooses not to out of selfishness instead (one of the four functioning principles: pragmatism, would need to be applied to decide). This could result in a disappointed family and/or a depressed husband or boyfriend who wanted to father a child. Allowing abortion societally might not be the most loving thing to do because there is a great need for adoption (2 million
It is becoming clear that custody evaluators tend to approach these cases with a culturally insensitive approach toward sexual orientation. This phenomenon is similar to the “color-blind” approach, which ignores differences between various racial groups, often times stripping them of their identity and unique needs. While it may seem politically correct to treat cases involving a same-sex parent as you would treat cases involving two heterosexual parents, failing to acknowledge and address critical differences in these cases violates our ethical responsibilities not only to our profession, but also ignores what is best for the children involved. The continuation of this research is vital in creating appropriate guidelines for custody evaluators and developing the proper training for psychologists to become competent to work on these specific types of cases. Moving this research forward as a dissertation project combines my passion for issues of diversity with my interest in the legal system.
By doing this, the reader gains a connection with Jennifer and helps them understand her motivation for her actions. This also helps Silvers arguments later on, using Jennifer’s story as a reference or an example as to why cloning is acceptable. “Narcissus Cloned” however, begins by stating Washington D.C’s concerns with the “ethical issues” and “moral values” that cloning with cause in society. Just from the beginning of both pieces, the reader can already see the bias of both authors, Silver being for cloning and Conley being strongly against it. Both Silver and Conley also disagree on the value of a cloned person’s life.
Symbols are important; they are a common cultural currency which we each use to help create our sense of self. Thus when the traditional nature of marriage is challenged in any way, so are people’s basic identities. By asking legislatures to pass “Defence of Marriage” acts, voters are using the law to create the cultural equivalent of a copyright or trademark on the institution of marriage to prevent it from be challenged too much. In 2003, when a bare majority of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ordered the state to recognize gay marriages, the three dissenting judges based their opposition largely on children. "It is difficult to imagine a State purpose more important and legitimate than ensuring, promoting, and supporting an
If ones pleasure is derived from sex with a partner of the same sex, and the deep love of a life partner is expressed to one of the same sex, then there cannot be anything wrong with that. The same biological urges that could lead to procreation in a heterosexual couple can be seen also in gay couples. A homosexual couple will go through lengths of artificial insemination, in the case of a lesbian couple, or adoption or hiring a surrogate mother in the case of a gay male couple. Denying the marriage of two people in love, by the ethical standards or our society is wrong. It is denying one the right to the pursuit of happiness.