Same-Sex Marriage and Opposition Arguments
Same-sex marriage is an issue that draws high contention in today's society. Despite the silence by most philosophers, Corvino mentions that the opponents of same-sex unions rely on three main arguments.
Argument 1: Importance of Biological Parents
First is that averagely, children grow and develop best under the care of biological parents. Marriage as a social intuition naturally recognizes the sharing of domestic life, mutual responsibility, and most of all, the rearing of children.
Argument 2: Traditional and Historical Proof
Another argument by opponents is founded on the traditional and historical proof that by its nature, marriage typically involves a union between a male and a female. As such, the definition of marriage is already set by nature, and it cannot be easily changed.
Argument 3: Comprehensive Union through Procreative Acts
Last is the opposition that marriage as a comprehensive union encompasses bodily unification through procreative-type acts. Essentially, coitus is an act whose purpose is primarily biological reproduction, and it unifies the man and woman as one philosopher mentions into one organism, literally (Garvey).
Therefore, Corvino maintains that merely mentioning that legal prohibition of same-sex marriage is not a cogent argument. Instead, he urges opponents of same-sex unions to fill the existing gaps that will transform this statement into a valid argument. The premises concerning the importance of biological parents in child raising, the historical and traditional evidence of the ideal nature of marriage as a male-female relationship, and the union through coitus for procreation confines marriage to heterosexual relations alone. This revelation validates the blatant opposition to same-sex marriage.
Corvino and Gallagher Arguments
An in-depth outlook on Gallagher's essay reveals that the arguments succeed in meeting Corvino's challenge. Particularly, Gallagher's premise that family structures composed of two biological parents is what matters most for the best welfare of the children matches with Corvino's first premise as discussed before. Secondly, Gallagher's explanations correspond with Corvino's regarding the fact that marriage is a critical institution that unifies the male-female divide purposefully for reproduction and child upbringing through love and commitment (Gallagher 378). In a nutshell, both Gallagher and Corvino arguments converge towards the view that marriage cannot be an artifact of law. Instead, it is a normative and social ideal.
Works Cited
Gallagher, Maggie. "What Marriage Is For." The Weekly Standard Magazine
11 August 2003: 377-382.
Garvey, James. "John Corvino on same sex marriage." 2 October 2013. Talking Philosophy. http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=7581. Accessed 14 February 2018.
