Here are some arguments for and against same-sex marriage. They're kind of rough outlines; you're welcome to make suggestions for improving them. They're
at least loosely based on articles in Andrew Sullivan, ed., Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con (New York: Vintage, 1997).
Basic liberal argument for a right to marry
1. People have the right to pursue happiness in a wide variety of forms, subject to this right's compatibility with like liberty for others.
2. Marriage is a central institution by which people pursue happiness.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
3. Therefore, people have the right to marry, limited only by considerations of compatibility with the rights of others to pursue happiness.
(Cf. Loving v. Virginia: "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free
men." In Sullivan 90.)
What does the "like liberty" limitation entail?
The definitional argument against same-sex marriage
1. Marriage is and has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
2. Therefore, a "marriage" between two men or two women could not be a true marriage. (See Jones v. Hallahan, in Sullivan 94-95.)
A conservative argument for same-sex marriage
1. Marriage provides important benefits to individuals, including emotional stability and economic security.
2. Marriage also benefits society by encouraging deep commitments between individuals, promoting the healthy rearing of children, and preserving the bonds among individuals and communities that maintain social stability (and enable the individual pursuit of happiness).
3. (We should promote that which benefits individuals and society.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4. Therefore, we should promote marriage.
5. Gays and lesbians are unsuited for opposite-sex marriage, but there is no prima facie reason why gays and lesbians could not receive the same benefits from same-sex marriage that straights receive from opposite-sex marriage.
6. Allowing gays and lesbians to marry would aid society by encouraging them to live more stable, mainstream lives.
7. Allowing gays and lesbians to marry would promote the institution of marriage by making marriage the societal ideal for all citizens.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
8. Therefore, we should allow and promote same-sex marriage. (See Sullivan 146-154.)
The child-rearing argument against same-sex marriage
1. "What is distinctive about marriage is that it is an institution created to sustain child-rearing" (Wilson, in Sullivan 166).
2. Gays and lesbians are not able to produce children as couples.
The argument from the wisdom of tradition
1. The longstanding traditions of society have evolved over many years and represent the collective wisdom of many generations.
2. These traditions have been fairly successful in promoting progress and social order.
3. Modern changes to these traditions are risky and often have disastrous societal results.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4. Therefore, we should support the longstanding traditions of our society.
5. One longstanding tradition of our society is the limitation of marriage to one man and one woman.
6. Allowing same-sex marriage would drastically harm or change traditional marriage, leading to unknown but probably harmful consequences for social stability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
7. Therefore, we should support tradition by promoting traditional marriage and opposing same-sex marriage.
The teleological argument against same-sex marriage
1. The human body has a natural teleology of reproduction: one man and one woman are needed to make a baby.
2. This natural teleology suggests that monogamous, heterosexual pairings are the best arrangements in which to rear children.
3. Opposite-sex marriage recognizes and conforms to this natural teleology of the body, while same-sex marriage does not.
4. Conforming to the teleology of the body promotes happiness, while opposing it results in suffering.
5. (We should promote that which promotes happiness and oppose that which promotes suffering.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
6. Therefore, we should promote opposite-sex marriage and oppose same-sex marriage.
The slippery-slope argument against same-sex marriage
1. The same types of considerations that oppose same-sex marriage are the considerations that oppose polygamous, adult/child, incestuous, and other non-standard marriages.
2. If we were to allow same-sex marriage, we would have no principled grounds upon which to oppose these other forms of marriage.
3. Polygamous, adult/child, incestuous, and other non-standard marriages are bad and should not be allowed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4. Therefore, we should oppose same-sex marriage as a way of keeping the door shut to these other forms of marriage. (See Arkes, in Sullivan 157-58, and the
section of readings on pp. 273-94.)
A radical leftist argument against same-sex marriage
1. Marriage is an oppressive societal institution: it oppresses the women, warps the men, and harms the children who are involved in it while also oppressing those who for whatever reason do not get married.
2. Gay liberation has promised a radical break with the oppressive societal-sexual structures of the past.
3. By working for or entering into same-sex marriages, gays and lesbians are betraying the promise of gay liberation and aiding their own oppression.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4. Therefore, gays and lesbians should oppose same-sex marriage.
A radical leftist argument for same-sex marriage
1. Marriage is an oppressive societal institution: it oppresses the women, warps the men, and harms the children who are involved in it while also oppressing those who for whatever reason do not get married.
2. However, marriage as an institution is constantly changing as society's attitudes and practices change.
3. If gays and lesbians were allowed to marry, their marriages would probably be more like existing gay and lesbian relationships than existing straight marriages.
4. By creating marriages that differed significantly from existing straight marriages, gays and lesbians would be changing society's attitudes and practices regarding marriage. These changes could help make marriage into a positive, healthy institution.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
5. Therefore, gays and lesbians should work for same-sex marriage as part of a broader agenda of sexual and gender liberation.