Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Background 4 Stock Issues and Audience Analysis



Download 65.66 Kb.
Page16/18
Date20.01.2021
Size65.66 Kb.
1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18
Need

Remedy

Disadvantages

devil

-To end inequality

-To equalize legal benefits

-To equalize child-rearing rights/benefits


-Legalizing same-sex marriage

-Changing the social definition

-Federal costs to change the law

-Regulating marriage (once redefined)


-The legal definition of marriage
Figure 1:

Audience Analysis

Figure 2:


Audience Groups

Demographics (education, gender, etc.)

Beliefs and Values

Types of persuasive arguments

Audiences concern

with a change

Millennials (born after 1980)

-53% in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage

-Highest rate of higher education (corresponds to greater approval rating)



-Acceptance

-Mobility

-74% affiliated with a religion


-Authoritative

-Motivational



-Moral cognitive dissonance

Gen X

(1965-1980)



-48% in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage

-Most have some higher education



-Freedom

-Mobility

-80% affiliated with a religion


-Substantive

-Motivational



-Moral cognitive dissonance

-Family structure changing



Baby Boomers (1946-1964)

-38% in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage

-Some level of higher education for about half of the population



-Tradition

-Hard work

-May be open to change

-87% affiliated with a religion



-Substantive

-Motivational



-Moral cognitive dissonance

-Family structure changing

-Will it cost me money (taxes)?


Silent Generation

(1928-1945)



-29% in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage

-Least percent of the population received higher education



-Tradition

-Hard work

-Commitment

-92% affiliated with a religion



-Motivational

-Moral cognitive dissonance

-Will it cost me money (taxes)?




Toulmin Models
Affirmative argument
No good reason” claim: Figure 3

Every reputable organization” claim: Figure 4



Negative arguments
Public does not favor same-sex marriage” claim: Figure 5

Man and woman” claim: Figure 6



Affirmative arguments inventory

  1. Marriage is an important part of American society and the right to marry should not be denied on the basis of sexual orientation.*

    1. There is a universal power in the phrase “We’re married.”

    2. Marriage says “We are family” in a very universal way.

    3. Some legal benefits of marriage: family health coverage, child custody, medical/bereavement leave, joint tax returns, income/estate tax benefits, cannot assume pension or Social Security benefits in the event of the death of his/her partner, medical decisions for an incapacitated partner, petition to immigrate, leave of absence (12 weeks) for an ill partner or parent(s) of a partner, parenting responsibilities can be brought into question, purchase continued health coverage for a partner in the event of unemployment (NASW website)

  2. Denial of marriage is one of the harshest inequalities inflicted on gay and lesbian families.*

    1. Denial of marriage is a violation of freedom of religion (more evidence).

    2. Breaks the equal protection clause AND the due process clause of the United States Constitution.

  1. 14th Amendment:  No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    1. Denying same-sex couples the right to marry is no different than denying heterosexual couples of different races the right to marry. Interracial marriage has been fully legal in the United States since the 1967 decision in the Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia.

  1. Many opponents to same-sex marriage have changed their position over the last two decades.*

    1. Bill Clinton, the president who signed the Defense of Marriage Act, decided to change his position after becoming acquainted with many same-sex couples and realizing “he was wrong.”

    2. Even many conservatives have come out in support of gay marriage, including Laura Bush, Cindy McCain, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Glenn Beck (not really, he went from saying it would lead to polygamy in May 2009 to saying in August 2010 “Well, it probably won’t kill anybody and it’s not really a threat to America.”)

    3. Similarly, public opinion of same-sex marriage had turned favorable in recent years. In November 2005, 66% of Canadians approved of gay marriage, vs. 49% in June 1996. http://civilliberty.about.com/od/gendersexuality/a/marriageamend.htm

  2. There is no good reason to exclude committed couples from marriage.*

    1. In the Proposition 8 trial in California, lead lawyer Charles Copper responded “I don’t know” when asked by Judge Vaughn Walker what harm there was in same-sex marriage.

    2. Judge Walker ruled “moral disapproval in an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians.”

    3. “If we allow same-sex marriage, then people will want to marry a chair, their cat, etc.” = this is a slippery slope argument without any logic or factual basis. Absolutely no proof this will happen.

  3. Same-sex marriage does no harm to other members of society.*

    1. I don’t know response

    2. Religion is not harmed – rites and celebration up to each individual religion

  4. Every reputable organizations (particularly child-welfare and health organizations) have come out in support of same-sex marriage.*

    1. American Academy of Pediatrics, National Association of Social Workers, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Anthropological Association,  American Sociological Association http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus39.pdf

    2. Child Welfare League of America

  5. Children are not harmed – in fact, same-sex marriage would help build stronger families.*

    1. The “children need a mother and father” argument is flawed because many single parents (mothers and fathers) raise children.

    2. Preventing a same-sex couple with existing children is actually more harmful because it prevents them from making a loving commitment to each other.

    3. Provides a more stable environment for children of same-sex couples

  6. Same-sex marriage could better the entire institution of marriage.

    1. Currently, divorce rates for heterosexual marriages are high. One argument against same-sex marriage is that it will undermine marriage. However, if gay couples in committed relationships were allowed to marry, it would improve marriage by providing more positive role models.

  7. The banning of same-sex marriage serves no secular purpose.

    1. Similar to #4, but in regards to the role of religion in deciding secular matters.

    2. As far as government is concerned, marriage is a secular institution.

    3. Government has no place in deciding the “sanctity” of marriage or deciding that it is sent down by God.

    4. Religion-based arguments have no basis in government – making any religious arguments (ie, homosexuality is a sin) void.

    5. The government should allow same-sex marriage – it is up to individual religious groups to decide whether to allow same-sex marriages.

  8. Marriage is the only acceptable alternative – civil unions and other arrangements are not the same as marriage.

    1. Allowing same-sex couples to enter a civil union is similar to “separate but equal” compromises made prior to the civil rights era.

  1. Separate but equal was outlawed in the 1954 Supreme Court case Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas

    1. Civil unions only offer protections on a state level.

    2. Some domestic partnerships offer limited benefits to couples.

    3. Immigration sponsorship, joint tax returns and other federal benefits could not be applied to those in civil unions.

    4. The Constitution guarantees equality for all, and these two institutions are not equal.

  1. The primary purpose of marriage is not procreation and child rearing.

    1. Allowing same-sex marriage will not cause the extinction of the human race – heterosexuals can still marry and reproduce.

    2. Marriage is about love and commitment, not procreation.

    3. Sterile men and women are allowed to marry – so why not homosexuals?

    4. One of the major problems faced by the world is overpopulation.

  2. Marriage has changed over the years, as have other “traditional” institutions.

    1. Changing of words in traditional marriage vows – taking out obey, man and wife

    2. Freely allowing divorce

    3. Other traditional institutions have been abolished (like slavery) – society changes

    4. Same-sex marriage does not alter heterosexual marriages in any way.

  3. Gay families who want children highly value family.

    1. Must spend large amounts of time and money to acquire a child.





Share with your friends:
1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18




The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2020
send message

    Main page