Debating Same-sex Marriage

Debating Same-sex Marriage

Book - 2012
Average Rating:
Rate this:
Polls and election results show Americans sharply divided on same-sex marriage, and the controversy is unlikely to subside anytime soon. This work provides a roadmap to the ongoing debate. Taking a "point/counterpoint" approach, the authors, one a philosopher and prominent gay advocate, and the other a nationally syndicated columnist and co-founder of the National Organization for Marriage, explore fundamental questions: What is marriage for? Is sexual difference essential to it? Why does the government sanction it? What are the implications of same-sex marriage for children's welfare, for religious freedom, and for our understanding of marriage itself? While the authors disagree on many points, they share the following conviction: because marriage is a vital public institution, this issue deserves a comprehensive, rigorous, thoughtful debate. This book provides a useful resource showcasing the key ideas in the ongoing debate over same-sex marriage. Both authors are prominent writers and speakers on same-sex marriage.
Publisher: New York : Oxford University Press, c2012
ISBN: 9780199756322
Characteristics: 281 p. ; 21 cm
Additional Contributors: Gallagher, Maggie 1960-


From the critics

Community Activity


Add a Comment

roaddogg09 May 20, 2013

Let me begin by stating that I'm an advocate of full marriage equality for same-sex couples. That being said, I always think it's important to engage with those whom you disagree and be able to see where their reasoning is coming from (even though you may ultimately disagree).

This is especially true when it comes to "Debating Same-Sex Marriage." I had no allusions that my mind would be changed by this book. My intent was to get a feel for where the marriage equality debate is and how the opposing side sees the issue. For that reason alone, this is a worthy book, no matter which side you find yourself.

Without getting into the content (yet), the book is set up in two parts: Part I has both authors provide their specific case for/against same-sex marriage. In Part II, each author gets a chance for a rebuttal. Each author covers a lot of ground, but both provide plenty of references for further reading.

Even though I found Corvino's arguments much more convincing and thorough, Gallagher was able to provide and defend her own view of why marriage should not be extended to same-sex couples. What I've been able to discern, her main arguments boils down to this: Marriage brings a male and female together in sexual congress, keeps males in monogamous relationships, and provides children bore from said sexual congress a stable home.

Her argument, though, fails for one single reason (which Corvino elaborates on and defends): No one is trying to remove children from homes with mothers and fathers. Where Gallagher's case ultimately fails is that she cannot connect "Children on average do best with their own married biological parents" to "We should not allow same-sex couples to marry." Since same-sex couples aren't trying to remove children from their biological parents, it's unclear how the first sentence leads to the second. As Corvino notes: there's a missing staircase.

I don't want to dwell on all their particular arguments, but safe to say, I believe Corvino provided a better case for same-sex marriage.


Add Age Suitability

There are no ages for this title yet.


Add a Summary

There are no summaries for this title yet.


Add Notices

There are no notices for this title yet.


Add a Quote

There are no quotes for this title yet.

Explore Further

Browse by Call Number

Subject Headings


Find it at MenloPark

To Top