PHI208 Ashford University Week 5 Same Sex Couples Legal Marriage Paper I attached the a few docs. A copy of the paper I submitted, the feedback I received from professor and the document of the final draft instructions. There wasn’t much she wanted fixed. Word count is about 1,300-1,500 Running head: SAME-SEX ESSAY
1
Same-Sex Essay
Samantha Mills-McClean
PHI 208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning
Prof. Angela Camaille
August 29, 2019
[no notes on this page]
-1-
Same-Sex Essay
Part 1: Ethical Question
1
The ethical question that has been considered for this particular essay is: Is it morally right for
legal marriage to be available for same-sex couples?
Part 2: Introduction
By same-sex marriage, it denotes the joining together of a couple of the same sex as
husband and wife. In most parts of the world today, the same-sex marriage issue is a topic of
extreme controversy and a subject in most of the religions across the globe. As such, the legal
status of this topic is subject to discussion but has gained an enormous significance of the last
few years, especially in the United States. Specifically, the current treatment and trends of samesex couples differ across different regions in the world. However, there are two competing views
regarding this topic and its legal applicability. One view opposes this kind of marriages, arguing
that by allowing such marriages would be contravening the constitution and the nature of the
institution of marriage. Moreover, proponents of this view argue that same-sex marriage is not
recognized in the constitution, and would, therefore, contribute to social evils in the society if
allowed. The other view favors same-sex marriage, arguing that freedom of choice must be the
basic and fundamental human right and that each individual is free to make choices about his or
her life.
According to Riggle et al (2017), under the 14th Amendment, the constitution provides
that no one should be denied his or her rights, properties, and life by the state. Furthermore, it
means that the constitution offers individuals expressive rights to make the choices they deem
appropriate in their lives, including marrying whoever they choose. Over the years, it is apparent
that different cultures have dealt with the subject of same-sex differently. Nevertheless, there are
-2-
1. has been
is being [Angela Camaille]
SAME-SEX ESSAY
3
several cultures that accept same-sex marriages whereas others consider them inappropriate
based on diverse reasons. As such, in most of the cases, factors such as secular and religion play
a significant part in determining the applicability and acceptance of these marriages. Religions
such as Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, as well as Judaism in addition to Hinduism, oppose samesex marriages, considering them as social ills that work to erode the strong fabrics that most
societies have been built upon. Therefore, countries that have these religions in dominance are
most likely to oppose same-sex unions.
Part 3: Explanation of the Ethical Theory
There is an enormous body of growing literature and scientific proof that intact and
opposite-sex marriages are the best for children. Specifically, Rothblum and Solomon (2003)
argue that one of the major threats to same-sex marriages is that such unions weaken the norm of
sexual conformity in marriage. These writers also state that such unions also work to isolate the
institution of marriage from its procreative function. However, there also exist several ethical
considerations that may be used to offer solutions to the above-presented completing arguments
on the same-sex union subject. One of such ethical theories is utilitarianism. When evaluated
critically, this theory’s views on same-sex unions offer the tools that may be used to defend or
oppose such marriages on the moral prescripts (Levin, 2011).
In a sense, this views on the objection of same-sex marriage and the oddness of such
marriages is that they do not stand up to any scrutiny as they do not limit the tenacity of sex for
procreation (Singer, 2006). The ultimate generalization of this theory is that the ends rationalize
1
the means. In particular, the utilitarianism theory holds that an action is considered right if it
contributes to the greater good for all or if it leads to good consequences. In this manner, the
goodness of an action is a measurable element, which can either be good or bad.
-3-
1. utilitarianism
I would have liked an entire
section on utilitarianism
instead of the other
information. The other
information is some good
support, but in this section
there should have been more
of a history and summary of
utilitarianism alone. [Angela
Camaille]
Something is also good when it leads to the attainment of pleasure, happiness, as well as
wellbeing and avoids harm to others. Thus, as for the utilitarian position, to determine the line
between what is right or wrong, a simple equation is applied to establish the consequences of a
particular action. As such, when there is more bad of action than its good, then such an action is
wrong, and vice versa. Marriage equality, thus, presents individuals with numerous factors to
consider.
Part 4: Application of the Ethical Theory
The ethical question under consideration here is whether it is morally right for legal
marriage to be available for same-sex couples. Same-sex marriage has been defined as the union
between two people of the same sex or gender. It is a controversial subject because it raises
several arguments from different quarters across the world. There exist two central arguments
regarding this topic: views from those that oppose and favor it. Each of these arguments presents
a diversity of reasons for opposing and supporting same-sex marriages. But, to find a solution to
this divide, the utilitarianism theory can be applied to provide ethical consideration when
deciding either to accept or reject such marriages. According to this theory, the ends would
usually justify the means (Bower, 2014). It argues that an action can be regarded as immoral if it
leads to harm and greater evil and vice versa.
1
When applied to the above question, this theory provides the necessary apparatuses that
solve the arguments, which have been raised from the two views already provided in the above
discussion. From the utilitarian argument, several people would directly gain from the approval
of same-sex marriages. Fundamentally, this theory approves this kind of marriages based on their
greater good for different members of the community (Bower, 2014). Here, utilitarian ethics
argue that these marriages have to be legalized because they benefit everyone. Hence, the greater
-4-
1. When
Good application. [Angela
Camaille]
SAME-SEX ESSAY
5
good would be achieved, and therefore, causing the least harm to others while fostering the best
possible communities where each person is equally guarded under the law.
[no notes on this page]
-5-
References
Rothblum, E., & Solomon, S. (2003). Civil unions in the State of Vermont: A report on the first
year. Burlington: the University of Vermont, Department of Psychology.
Bower, C. (2014). Juggling rights and utility: A legal and philosophical framework for analyzing
same-sex marriage in the wake of United States v. Windsor. Calif. L. Rev., 102, 971.
Levin, H. Y. (2011). Resolving Interstate Conflicts Over Same-Sex Non-Marriage. Fla. L.
Rev., 63, 47.
Riggle, E. D., Wickham, R. E., Rostosky, S. S., Rothblum, E. D., & Balsam, K. F. (2017). Impact
of civil marriage recognition for long-term same-sex couples. Sexuality Research and
Social Policy, 14(2), 223-232.
Singer, P. (2006). Homosexuality is not immoral.
[no notes on this page]
-6-
Running head: SAME-SEX ESSAY
1
Same-Sex Essay
Samantha Mills-McClean
PHI 208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning
Prof. Angela Camaille
August 29, 2019
SAME-SEX ESSAY
2
Same-Sex Essay
Part 1: Ethical Question
The ethical question that has been considered for this particular essay is: Is it morally right for
legal marriage to be available for same-sex couples?
Part 2: Introduction
By same-sex marriage, it denotes the joining together of a couple of the same sex as
husband and wife. In most parts of the world today, the same-sex marriage issue is a topic of
extreme controversy and a subject in most of the religions across the globe. As such, the legal
status of this topic is subject to discussion but has gained an enormous significance of the last
few years, especially in the United States. Specifically, the current treatment and trends of samesex couples differ across different regions in the world. However, there are two competing views
regarding this topic and its legal applicability. One view opposes this kind of marriages, arguing
that by allowing such marriages would be contravening the constitution and the nature of the
institution of marriage. Moreover, proponents of this view argue that same-sex marriage is not
recognized in the constitution, and would, therefore, contribute to social evils in the society if
allowed. The other view favors same-sex marriage, arguing that freedom of choice must be the
basic and fundamental human right and that each individual is free to make choices about his or
her life.
According to Riggle et al (2017), under the 14th Amendment, the constitution provides
that no one should be denied his or her rights, properties, and life by the state. Furthermore, it
means that the constitution offers individuals expressive rights to make the choices they deem
appropriate in their lives, including marrying whoever they choose. Over the years, it is apparent
that different cultures have dealt with the subject of same-sex differently. Nevertheless, there are
SAME-SEX ESSAY
3
several cultures that accept same-sex marriages whereas others consider them inappropriate
based on diverse reasons. As such, in most of the cases, factors such as secular and religion play
a significant part in determining the applicability and acceptance of these marriages. Religions
such as Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, as well as Judaism in addition to Hinduism, oppose samesex marriages, considering them as social ills that work to erode the strong fabrics that most
societies have been built upon. Therefore, countries that have these religions in dominance are
most likely to oppose same-sex unions.
Part 3: Explanation of the Ethical Theory
There is an enormous body of growing literature and scientific proof that intact and
opposite-sex marriages are the best for children. Specifically, Rothblum and Solomon (2003)
argue that one of the major threats to same-sex marriages is that such unions weaken the norm of
sexual conformity in marriage. These writers also state that such unions also work to isolate the
institution of marriage from its procreative function. However, there also exist several ethical
considerations that may be used to offer solutions to the above-presented completing arguments
on the same-sex union subject. One of such ethical theories is utilitarianism. When evaluated
critically, this theory’s views on same-sex unions offer the tools that may be used to defend or
oppose such marriages on the moral prescripts (Levin, 2011).
In a sense, this views on the objection of same-sex marriage and the oddness of such
marriages is that they do not stand up to any scrutiny as they do not limit the tenacity of sex for
procreation (Singer, 2006). The ultimate generalization of this theory is that the ends rationalize
the means. In particular, the utilitarianism theory holds that an action is considered right if it
contributes to the greater good for all or if it leads to good consequences. In this manner, the
goodness of an action is a measurable element, which can either be good or bad.
SAME-SEX ESSAY
4
Something is also good when it leads to the attainment of pleasure, happiness, as well as
wellbeing and avoids harm to others. Thus, as for the utilitarian position, to determine the line
between what is right or wrong, a simple equation is applied to establish the consequences of a
particular action. As such, when there is more bad of action than its good, then such an action is
wrong, and vice versa. Marriage equality, thus, presents individuals with numerous factors to
consider.
Part 4: Application of the Ethical Theory
The ethical question under consideration here is whether it is morally right for legal
marriage to be available for same-sex couples. Same-sex marriage has been defined as the union
between two people of the same sex or gender. It is a controversial subject because it raises
several arguments from different quarters across the world. There exist two central arguments
regarding this topic: views from those that oppose and favor it. Each of these arguments presents
a diversity of reasons for opposing and supporting same-sex marriages. But, to find a solution to
this divide, the utilitarianism theory can be applied to provide ethical consideration when
deciding either to accept or reject such marriages. According to this theory, the ends would
usually justify the means (Bower, 2014). It argues that an action can be regarded as immoral if it
leads to harm and greater evil and vice versa.
When applied to the above question, this theory provides the necessary apparatuses that
solve the arguments, which have been raised from the two views already provided in the above
discussion. From the utilitarian argument, several people would directly gain from the approval
of same-sex marriages. Fundamentally, this theory approves this kind of marriages based on their
greater good for different members of the community (Bower, 2014). Here, utilitarian ethics
argue that these marriages have to be legalized because they benefit everyone. Hence, the greater
SAME-SEX ESSAY
5
good would be achieved, and therefore, causing the least harm to others while fostering the best
possible communities where each person is equally guarded under the law.
SAME-SEX ESSAY
6
References
Rothblum, E., & Solomon, S. (2003). Civil unions in the State of Vermont: A report on the first
year. Burlington: the University of Vermont, Department of Psychology.
Bower, C. (2014). Juggling rights and utility: A legal and philosophical framework for analyzing
same-sex marriage in the wake of United States v. Windsor. Calif. L. Rev., 102, 971.
Levin, H. Y. (2011). Resolving Interstate Conflicts Over Same-Sex Non-Marriage. Fla. L.
Rev., 63, 47.
Riggle, E. D., Wickham, R. E., Rostosky, S. S., Rothblum, E. D., & Balsam, K. F. (2017).
Impact of civil marriage recognition for long-term same-sex couples. Sexuality Research
and Social Policy, 14(2), 223-232.
Singer, P. (2006). Homosexuality is not immoral.
Part 1: Introduction
In this section of the paper, you will begin with your ethical question, introduce the topic
and paper, and close with a thesis statement.
•
•
•
The ethical question may be the same as your Week 3 written assignment
(“Applying an Ethical Theory”) or a revised version of it.
The introduction should be revised in a way that reflects your additional thinking on
the issue and question.
End this section with a thesis statement that states your position on the issue (the
answer to the ethical question you believe is strongest) and provides a brief
summary of the main ideas you will be presenting in the paper. Please see the
assignment guidance for examples of thesis statements.
Place the introduction under the Part 1: Introduction heading.
Part 2: Ethical Argument
In this section of the paper, you will present the strongest argument you can in support
of the position you have stated in your introduction.
•
•
This will be similar to the “supporting reasons” you offered in the first assignment;
however, this argument should reflect your research into the key ethical issues that
need to be identified and addressed, the arguments on different sides of this
problem, and the theories of moral reasoning we have studied in the class (you will
discuss the specific details and implications of the moral theories in the next two
sections).
You can think of this as a summary of the main argument you would give if you were
an attorney trying to convince a jury of your position.
Place this information under the Part 2: Ethical Argument heading.
Part 3: Explanation and Defense
In this section, you will explain and defend your argument by drawing on the moral
theory that aligns most closely with the argument you presented in Part 2. This may be
the same theory you discussed in your second assignment, but it may also be a
different theory.
•
You must first explain the theory in general terms similar to how you explained a
theory in your second assignment, including a brief account of the historical
background of the theory and the philosopher(s) associated with it and general
overview of the core moral ideal or principle of the theory, including the way it guides
and constrains moral reasoning.
•
•
You should then clearly show how your argument represents an application of that
form of moral reasoning.
In other words, if the argument you present in Part 2 is utilitarian, deontological, or
virtue-based (teleological), you will want to explain utilitarianism, deontology, or
virtue ethics in general terms, then explain how your argument from Part 2 reflects
or draws upon the core principles and values of that theory. Place this section under
the
Part 3: Explanation and Defense heading.
Part 4: Objection and Response
In this section of the paper, you will presen t the strongest objection you can to your
argument, and briefly defend that objection by appealing to a different ethical theory
than the one you focused on in Part 3.
•
•
•
Briefly explain the core moral ideal or principle of the theory and how that could be
the basis of an objection to your argument. For instance, if you explained and
defended your own argument by applying the principles of virtue ethics, you could
raise an objection from the perspective of utilitarianism by briefly explaining the core
utilitarian principle and how applying that principle could lead someone to a different
conclusion than the one you are defending.
Next, you should respond to the objection by explaining why it is not strong enough
to undermine the main argument in defense of your position.
See the assignment guidance for suggestions on how to effectively respond to the
objection.
Place this section under the Part 4: Objection and Response heading.
Part 5: Conclusion
In this section of the paper, provide a summary of what you have done in the paper by
briefly describing what you accomplished in each of the above sections.
Place this section under the Part 5: Conclusion heading.
In your paper,
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduce the topic and paper.
Provide a thesis statement.
Present an argument in support of the position.
Defend the argument by explaining and applying the ethical theory that most closely
aligns with the argument.
Present an objection to the argument by appealing to a different ethical theory.
Respond to the objection.
•
Provide a conclusion that describes what was accomplished in each of the sections
of the paper.
The Ethical Reasoning Final Paper
•
Must be 1,300 to 1,500 words in length (not including title and references pages)
and formatted according to APA style
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.