Summary Of Jonathan Rauch's Arguments Against Same Sex Marriage

Same-sex marriage has been one of the most controversial issues in the United States. Our society appears to be somewhat divided over same-sex marriage. There are different opinions about whether same-sex couples should be or should not be extended the privilege to be married. In the article, “For Better or Worse,” Jonathan Rauch examines the arguments against same-sex marriage and demonstrates why the claims are false. The structure of the article is designed to analyze statements used against recognizing same-sex marriage. Throughout the article Rauch applies the principle of charity to evaluate the validity of the following statements against homosexual marriage: 1) We should not tamper with the traditional institution of marriage 2) The purpose or

He notes that there are several other reasons for marriage that are “critical to the functioning of a humane and stable society” (Rauch, “For Better or Worse,” p. 22). Rauch provides two potential candidates for the purpose of marriage, which are: “domesticating men and providing reliable caregivers” (Rauch, “For Better or Worse,” p. 22). He explains that society’s biggest issue is civilizing young men. Since marriage stabilizes men, Rauch says, it (marriage) has the ability to settle men and reduce the chances of young men participating in reckless behavior. The second purpose of marriage is to provide reliable caregivers when “someone is beset by some sort of burdensome contingency” (Rauch, “For Better or Worse,” p. 22). In the case of marriage, if a spouse is diagnosed with cancer or could be unemployed, there will be at least one reliable person who will provide care in their time of need. If domesticating men and providing reliable caregivers serve as purposes of marriage, homosexual couples should marry. Rauch settles with the idea that marriage should be a norm and homosexual couples ought to be held to the same