Marriage is a start of new life. Everyone wants to marry their lover, but if the lover is the same-sex person as you, it can be problem. Many countries haven't allowed same-sex couples to marry. what do you think about it? Should it be legalized?
According to this article, Argentina legalized gay marriage, and there are more countries where have legalized it already in the picture. There are lots of arguments about gay marriage; for example, Ines Frank said that "the essence of a family is between two people of opposite sexes, and it's not discrimination" (¶. 3). The legislation passed by 33 votes to 27 with three abstentions, so Argentina became the first country to legalize gay marriage.
According to my dictionary, marriage is the legal relationship between a husband and wife, it's not wrong but not the best definition for me. The best one is that marriage is the legal relationship between lovers. Love is not only between a man and woman, but it also can be a man and man, or a woman and woman.
__________
References
I'm not homosexual by the way.
ReplyDeleteSo, Ines Frank clearly defines marriage the same way Akira's dictionary does: a relationship "between two people of opposite sexes" where being of opposite sexes is essential.
ReplyDeleteAlthough he says it's not wrong, Akira does seem to me to think that both Frank and his dictionary give bad, in fact wrong, definitions of the word marriage. If you say that marriage is something that leaves the sexes of he partners open or irrelevant, such as Akira's definition of marriage as "the legal relationship between lovers" then you are saying that there is something wrong with both Frank's and the dictionary definition, neither of which would count a loving legal relationship between two women as a marriage.
__________
In fact, I very nearly included the following on the list of essay questions on Thursday:
As well as making Barack Obama president, the US presidential election of 2008 also decided several other issues. In the state of California, voters approved Proposition 8 to amend the state’s constitution so as to “specify in state law that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” (Legislative Analyst’s Office, 2008, ¶ 2). On the other hand, other US states, such as Massachusetts, have legalised gay and lesbian marriages. Which laws are right? Can two men really make a marriage? How about three women?
References
Legislative Analyst's Office, State of California. (2008, July 17). Proposition 8: Limit on Marriage. Constitutional Amendment. Retrieved July 17, 2010 from http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2008/8_11_2008.aspx
I decided not to include it because although it's the same sort of controversial question that where the argument, very explicitly, depends on the definition of a single word, it's also very difficult. However, if you would like to write an answer to this question as stated above, please feel welcome. As Akira's timely post shows, there is plenty of material available from both sides of the argument.
And in the New York Times today: "One Bride for 2 Brothers: A Custom Fades in India"
ReplyDeleteAnd since the question is there, I might as well publish at least one answer.
ReplyDeleteYou can click here to download the 3rd draft of Roong's answer to the question that asks for a definition of marriage.
Note
This was a more difficult question than the ones you are choosing from, and the students had a full week to work on it. Roong wrote this essay in January this year as the second writing assignment for a level 6 AEP Reading and Writing class, so the level is comparable, since we are now at the end of level 5.
Her entire essay is very good, but I would especially suggest that you carefully read the thesis statement, which is normally the single most important sentence in an essay.
It might give you some ideas on how to approach your own answer, as well as being relevant to the topic that Akira has brought up.
May be this is a new chapter of a "Natural Selection Theory". Men mary with men, women mary with women, birth rate might logically decrease, finally world population will be balance by this coincident.
ReplyDeleteMy own current thesis statement from Jnuary (which is actually my 3rd version), to answer the marriage question is: "The argument, which really is about the meaning of the word marriage, not the rights of the parties, must conclude, since marriage is defined not by purpose or even form alone, but by a sanctioned agreement, that laws permitting same-sex marriage betray the correct understanding of the word."
ReplyDeleteHowever, having been prompted by Akira to have a second look and a second thought about the issues, I've substantially changed my mind, so I also need to seriously revise my thesis statement, and then rewrite much of the body of the essay. I don't much like the language in the current version of my thesis statement either. I think it could be clearer, although probably not shorter - it does need to be a long sentence.
Marriage is a very complex question.
And how is your provisional thesis statement coming along?
I've just written the new thesis statement which I think is a better answer to the question, and which I think I can support. As you can see, it's a completely different answer to the one above.
ReplyDeleteMy current provisional thesis statement:
"This argument, which really is about the meaning of the word marriage, not the rights of the parties, cannot be settled by any definition which depends on a consideration of purpose or even of form alone; on the contrary, since marriage is a function by which a socially approved institution grants official recognition and approval to a relationship, laws that prohibit same-sex marriage are as correct as laws which allow it."
It's also long, but that doesn't worry me. I think that using a semi-colon and adverbial conjunction to break it up has also made it clearer and easier for readers.
What do you think? Is it easier to follow the main idea that is my answer to the question?
Does it tell you what I'm planning to do in the body of my essay?
Which answer do you agree with, the one above, from February, or today's very different revised answer?
I'll upload the current version of my answer, which is only the introduction (I didn't need to rewrite that) and the first body paragraph, later.
I've just uploaded the MS Word file which is my current incomplete answer to the question about same sex marriage laws: "Set Asunder".
ReplyDeleteIt includes notes on my thinking and research.