DEBATE ON SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
Same sex marriage has been a controversial issue in the society today. It is among those issues which philosophers and debaters have argued and ponder upon. Regardless of all the attention, or possibly due to the attention, instead of resolving the issue, the controversy surrounding it continues to increase. It appears that the issue of same-sex marriage has outstripped what is acceptable by only reasons that are publicly identifiable, as claims against the practice have appeared to move towards the public field of wide-ranging values instead of remaining within the public sphere and explained from the point of view of public reason. This paper is a discussion of the argument that public reason as conceived by John Rawls is incapable of providing solution to resolving the issue of same-sex marriage. Considering the Marriage Privatization Model to prove that the Rawlsian doctrine is insufficient in addressing the issue of same-sex marriage.
The argument that the institution of marriage is a significant cultural one, does not lead to the notion that the institutions is not flexible. On the other hand, there is an even stronger claim against the estimation of Dworkin, which is that there is an even greater position against the practice than it is illustrated. This paper will provide an argument against same-sex marriage using the Marriage Privatization Model. From the model, the argument is that the support of same-sex marriage by the government is not appropriate, and thus, the most legitimate and convincing claim against the practice would be that the support of the practice by the states all over the world should be condemned. From a Rawlsian point of view, which is based on public reason, this paper will prove that the public reason argument is inadequate in resolving the issue. The state should not support civil unions between two people of the same sex, but only those of heterosexual couples. Therefore, the argument presented in this paper is that the only convincing and sustainable argument to oppose same-sex marriage is the argument to make the marriages private. The Marriage Privatization Model is the only one that is sustainable as long as it is related to the Rawlsian doctrine. There is also a significant reason why people should commit themselves to public reason in dealing with controversial issues like same-sex marriage.
Before digressing into the main issue it will be important to discuss and bring up the the definition of public reason, according to the Rawlsian doctrine. The notion of public reason is one of the components that Rawls as made up as an organized constitutional democratic society. Public reason plays a key role in defining the content and form which the people should apply in debating with one another in important argumentative issues. The argument presented by Rawls is that public reason is important due to the fact that the society which is democratic should have reasonable variety. This means that the society is expected to have numerous contradictory religious and well as moral wide-ranging philosophies.
We will send an essay sample to you in 24 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.Get help with my paper