I found many flaws in Gallagher’s piece opposing same-sex marriage. One point that left me dumbfounded was Gallagher’s argument that marriage is for the reproduction of children, and thus same-sex marriage should not be allowed. It’s true that same-sex couples cannot themselves reproduce, but it’s not as if disallowing any type of union between people of the same sex would drive them into heterosexual relationships, where they could reproduce. Furthermore, Gallagher refutes the idea that there is evidence that children raised in same-sex households are not worse off than children raised by heterosexual parents. She then goes on to discuss how the institution of marriage is in shambles – half of marriages end in divorce, the majority of children will experience a fatherless or motherless household, etc. Does Gallagher not consider that even if children raised by gay parents are worse than children raised by straight parents, they are almost certainly better off raised by any two people (same sex or not) than only a mother or father? She is essentially making the argument for proponents of same-sex marriage by saying this because it would seem that a homosexual couple adopting children would be better than what they are currently experiencing. She goes on to shoot herself in the foot again by almost pinning the problems facing marriage on the same ideals that allow same-sex marriage, when she previously states how little of the population is made up of “same-sex registered domestic partnerships.”
I completely agree that Gallagher’s argument has many holes. I especially like your comment on same-sex couples’ children being better off than any child of a heterosexual single parent. Adding to this idea, a child is also far better off in a same-sex household than in a foster home, and many gay couples adopt children because of their lack of ability to have their own.
I agree with what you have to say, but I would also like to add that by making the point of hetereosexual marriage being mainly for reproduction purposes, she majorly discounts the hetersexual couples that either choose not to have children or cannot have children due to infertility. Would Gallagher not say that those heterosexual marriages should also be outlawed by her guidelines?
I, also, agree with your post. I feel as if Gallagher was making many points that in a way refuted what she said in the point before. She doesn’t really analyze her arguments well and I personally think that she is refusing to look at both sides. The benefits of same sex couples adopting and raising kids and giving some kids a better future is completely ignored by Gallagher.