We will write a custom Assessment on No Need to Justify Our Love specifically for you
301 certified writers online
- Taking alcohol is a lifestyle (cc).
Lifestyle entails many things and is not limited to some aspects of our life.
Therefore, cycling, becoming a vegetarian, moving out of geographical locality or being gay is also lifestyle choices (xcc).
- Lifestyle is does not attract interest (cc).
Therefore, it happens to be arrogant to refer to gay as mere choice of lifestyle. It should not be disguised in the veil of ‘common sense’ (xcc).
- Lifestyle is wearing accessories of various design and shape (cc).
Been gay is not all that, and should not be labeled as such, as it a show of discrepancy despite the media hullabaloo that centers on the fact about sexual anomalies associated with it.
- Having a sexual orientation is a birth right (cc).
Gay couples should be in a position to have and enjoy the same since it is their birth right too (xcc).
- Some laws are just made to oppress the minority (cc).
Gays are a minority in society and the amendment of the marriage act to lock out gay marriages is another attempt at the discrepancy of the minorities, this time gays.
- Marriages are man and woman unions since the day immemorial (cc).
Gays and other same sex associations are and man and woman based and hence they cannot qualify to be marriages. Hence if that is the case they should scraped and should not be allowed t o continue on whatever basis (xcc).
- Statistics show an overwhelming support for gay especially in Australia and in the Americas (cc).
The government should not shy away from all that support shown everywhere and should live to the expectation of the people and come up with legislation that supports the same (xcc).
- America is a big country (cc).
Most of the people support the issue of gay marriage. In Australia where the population is quite small in comparison with the American one, gay has seen the light of the government and has been approved. America should embrace the same human rights approach shown by a smaller country and have the right upheld for that section of the minorities (xcc).
The study starts with a sentence alluding to the fact that taking alcohol is a lifestyle choice. The author goes on to enumerate other activities that he also allude being lifestyle choices like cycling a bicycle, becoming a vegetarian or relocating to a seaside. This is a case of counter consideration. The author, having considered the first act as a lifestyle choice, concludes the later can also be the same.
The issue of homosexuals is discussed at large; long and unwinding counter considerations for the reader to decipher are used. If buying accessories is a lifestyle issue, and they say that homosexuality is an issue of lifestyle, then the comparison becomes demeaning and rather arrogant and despicable to treat a minority grouping of people.
A country like Australia has upheld the rights for gay marriages following studies that have shown greater support for the same. This support is rather vibrant also in the United States and the same ought to be done so as human rights may be seen o manifest itself and unfairness treated with disdain (Fisher and Scriven, 1997).
The issue of 17 year olds who happened to tie the knot just the other day is a case analogical argument that is normative in nature. If their wedding is stopped as was stopped anyway, they will turn 18 years in a matter of time and that will mean they enter automatically in the right for marriage bracket. However, the issue of gay rights which entails adults older than the two notorious young adults are been curtailed and put on hold. It makes no sense according to the writer.
Marriages are meant for children and fun in satisfaction brought about by sex. That is true for the gays as much as fun is involved. This is putting into consideration that some marriages bear children while don’t. So people enter into marriage for fun in that case and it is legal. Then why not legalize homosexuality based on simple inductive reasoning?
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
Deduction and Induction
Lifestyle is anything that a person does to enhance his livelihood. Like riding a bicycle and building a house in the south coast to move into. Therefore, Based on inductive and deductive reasoning, choosing sexual orientation ought to be a lifestyle. One can choose to have same sex partner or an opposite sex one.
Marriages are also reserved for man and woman. If it involves anyone who happens to come from the same sex orientation, it is not marriage. Is government justified to curtail such marriages? Based on the deductive reasoning approach, it happens that the government, in this case, is right in denying gays that right.
Most Australians, however, support the marriage for gay. This is despite been a small country. Almost a similar percentage of Americans support homosexuality. However, the Australian government has enacted laws that govern and uphold gay rights. This is not the case in America. Based on deductive reasoning, it follows that Americans will automatically feel more oppressed considering they are majority.
Based on the same concept, the lawmakers in the United States continue to offer very flimsy, if nay, reasons for the failure to enact the supporting legislation for the gay. They engage in innuendos and jumping the gun on that issue. This is a character of fear. They fear been segregated politically. Fear is an operative word and hence in this case it should not apply as it is a case of rights of fellow humans been put on the limelight (Fisher and Scriven, 1997).
Inferences and Fallacies
There are negative-allusion and positive-allusion arguments. The above case has much of the two that leaves the reader to judge or to decipher. By alluding to the Australian study that gives the issue of gay rights the green light, authors want to point out to the United States government the manner in which it is treading on the human rights of its people.
In that way it may warrant the appropriate action from that government and have the right for the gay approved. However, there is a fallacy as United States has not done anything to suggest that it is not upholding human rights. It is considering other groups that form the larger of the country.
The word fear is used to refer to the operations of humans. However, in this text case study, it is also used to infer to homosexuality as a fear that tries to evade the ordinary marriages and the responsibilities that come with it. This fear is an inference that borders on fallacy and misrepresentation of facts.
Domestic violence is inferred to show the rotting of opposite sex marriages. Although this is a great fallacy in terms of facts, it is an inference that same sex marriages should be given a try as they might be the medicine needed to heal the rot in opposite sex marriages.
There is mention of 17 year olds who want to tie the knot but the law goes on to hinder that on age basis. This is an inference to the fact that it is null and void since they will hide and do what married couples do and tie the knot the moment they hit 18 years. Broadly it alludes to the fact that gays may be denied their rights for now to operate openly. However, they will do their thing in hiding until that time they get the required green light from the government of the United States.
By saying that the institution of marriage has withstood far greater challenges than a couple of drunkard teens, the author brings to the fore the simplicity of the gay issue. It means that those saying that the institution of marriage will be compromised are wrong on that front. It has withstood many challenges, and it will also withstand this one. This is great fallacy as the issue is that light. Many an organization has been critical of it and the government is in the forefront in the demonization of it.
The text combines many critical thinking aspects. The issue discussed is marred by allusions and great fallacies. It also has arguments that are normative and analogical. The issue combines inductive and deductive reasoning that is coupled with conclusions that are for the reader to decipher. It also has notable generalizations that try to create or magnify situations at hand.
Fisher, A. & Scriven, M. (1997) Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment. United States: Center for Research in Critical Thinking (UK) and Edgepress (US).