The Exit Exam
Spring 2005 AnchorSets
Topic: 
Back to:
Previous:
“I now pronounce you husband and wife.” This is what is traditionally said after vows of love are exchanged in a Christian wedding ceremony. The meaning of these words are the same no matter what language, culture, or religion you hear them in. So what is marriage, and how is it defined. Open up a dictionary, and it would say it is the coming together of a man and a woman in everything – love, happiness, and in life. Therefore, it is perfectly understandable why homosexual citizens of America would want to be part of this auspicious occasion. They want to experience the joy marriage brings in life, and to have the rights married people have. Despite this, if the government were to allow gay marriages, the definition of marriage would change forever.
My views stem from my very traditional culture – Hinduism. I have been raised with the sacredness and auspiciousness of marriage instilled in my, and strongly believe marriage is a union between a man and a woman. This does not mean homosexuals should be deprived of this institution, but it does mean they should understand why this custom is one that should be preserved in its traditional form.
The first problem that would obviously arise if government constitutionalized gay marriages, is the actual definition of marriage would be changed. It would no longer be recognized as a union between a man and a woman, but a union between two people. this could lead to what the government calls the ‘slippery-slope effect,’ where the people of America will push the boundary on what constitutes a marriage. So who would say that two brothers, who are not gay, but would like to receive the benefits that married people receive, could not get married? To further push the envelope, who would say that two woman and a man could not get married, as one woman is bi-sexual, and loves the other two in equal amounts? This is what I mean when I put my view of gay marriage across. Not only will the definition change, but so will the sanctity of it.
Changing the definition of marriage could cause chaos in a society such as ours. Young children would grow up confused, not knowing what to believe is right or wrong. People wanting to marry may be discouraged, sit it may seem like somewhat of a joke. Another point to think about is, how would divorce proceedings be settled in a marriage between three partners? What about children in marriages between three people, how might they be affected? It could lead to them having problems later on I life in their own relationships.
Although I am in support of the government’s decision opposing gay marriages, as they are not the best idea for our society, I do support civil union laws. Those allow gay citizens to live together in the form of a marriage, just with out as many benefits. In spite of this, the benefits they do receive, are the essential ones. Examples include being allowed to be at the bedside of a dying partner, or having a share of their values after death. Homosexual people need to understand that in this everchanging world, marriage is one of the few traditionalistic views alive in our society today. A law allowing gay marriages would change this, and would consequently change society forever.
As the preceeding information states, I am not against homosexuals being happy, (i.e. homophobic). What I do oppose is their everlasting fight to live in a society where gay marriages are accepted. I agree with them seeking peace, and happiness. After all, they are human and deserve all the natural rights humans receive. Despite this, I am not willing to sacrifice the institution of marriage, one of the few traditional customs preserved throughout the entire world, for this right of theirs’.
Grade: 6-6
Word Count: 560
Analysis: Although the argument is specious (the “slippery-slope effect” is falsely leading from one effect to others), the writer does write from a balanced viewpoint and supports the topic with personal evidence. The writing is grammatically sound (there are a few spelling and punctuation errors, but nothing consistent).
It is important to understand that the content and perspective is not (or should not be) judged too harshly in evaluation of Freshman Composition I writing. The final evaluation is based on the use of evidence to reach a clearly-stated thesis. Issues such as logical fallacies, agreement or disagreement with the topic itself are best addressed in the classroom environment, not in the exit exam.