Refuting the Claims in Adam Kolasinski’s The Secular Case Against Gay M

Refuting the Claims in go Kolasinskis The Secular Case Against spanking MarriageGay uniting has been one of the most controversial topics of the twenty first century and the topic has mainly circulated around such issues as procreation and marriage benefits. Although Adam Kolasinski, the author of The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage, never refers to transgender behavior as wrong, he argues several key points, including financial issues, to conclude why homosexual marriage is not allowed in the majority of states. The author, with a degree in financial economics, will first of all already have a aslant attitude towards any subject that promotes a better fiscal policy. Second of all, financial economics represents only one factor in the debate of funny marriage. This minute detail diminishes the authors argument significantly since he is probably not extensively knowledgeable in the subject, even if some of his positions atomic number 18 legitimate. Kolasinskis assertions and assumptions contain falsehoods and flaws, specifically concerning the overemphasis on procreation and the notion of sexual love.Kolasinski begins his debate with the notion that marriage is not a universal right. He states that a majority of states ban many people from marrying one an opposite including first cousins, blood relatives, and people with venereal diseases. Although these statements hold true, the United States did not allow other traditional or normal marriages. For example, in the 1960s, the government would not allow interracial marriages. This exemplifies how the government and the majority can sometimes be tyrannical or even wrong. Obviously, two heterosexuals of different races can marry without any government opposition. Although marriage... ... the government and a majority of states ban homosexual marriage. Although many of these claims tend to be opinions and even falsehoods, the author contributes a strong argument. Many appeal cases have been issued due to the huge controversy of homosexual marriage. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court concluded that the Constitution places limits on a States right to interfere with a persons most basic decisions about family and ancestry(Moss 106). This contradicts with all the rules and regulations that the states place upon marriage and more specifically gay marriage. There have been several cases on the violations of homosexual rights, but laws have not shortly been changed so that they have equality in all aspects. In the future, society will hopefully mirror the solution to the 1960s prohibited interracial marriage and permit homosexual marriage.