Sprigg's Argument Analysis

463 Words2 Pages

Sprigg’s viewpoint is that “homosexual relationships are not marriage because they are not between the union of a man and a woman and that homosexual relationships are harmful because they do not provide the same benefits to society as heterosexual marriages, but their consequences are far more negative than positive” (Finsterbusch, 2012, p.124).
Sprigg’s comments are supported by figures on higher rates of diseases, higher rates of mental health issues, and national opinion polls that say people do not support gay marriage. He has some valid points and does have his opinion about the subject. However, when it comes to same-sex marriages I am divided on this subject for different reasons. First, I think we should not judge people or what they …show more content…

Health insurance, estate taxes, family leave, and pensions are some of the issues that arise with benefits to name a few examples. Furthermore, I can see why these issues do come into the equation and because of that couples should be allowed to marry and have the same entitlements.
Some of the questions in the post referred to if the laws were changed and domestic partners benefits did have equal rights in every state, would same-sex couples want to get married? My viewpoint on this is they would not have to get married then if it was only about the benefits and they could get them without marriage, however, that is not the answer because couples want to get married because they love each other, so that is not solving the whole issue.
The aspect of other types of relationships, defining a family, and where we draw boundaries does need to be considered also because you open up a whole different scope of types of relationships that will argue with some of the same issues and I cannot say that agree with all that, so it puts me in an awkward position because if I agree with one thing how can I not support others and in the end it is all about my own opinion and judgment and it is alright to agree or disagree!