Close Prompts: Against Gay Marriage

Before i begin, I would like to clarify that i'm all for gay marriage and i have nothing against loving the same gender but this article proved to be interesting and I figured maybe i'll practice reading and analyzing from another person's point of view and discarding my own. Like Ms. Holmes said, sometimes, you need to step into the author world and leave your opinion behind. So here is me leaving my opinion behind. 


----


Recent television series and movies prove to support the expression of oneself, specifically on the topic of being openly gay. This movement that has slowly been gaining momentum since the 20th century where individualism became just as important as conformism in a communism society. However, little light has been shed on the other side of the argument and Eddie Thompson, in response, writes The Argument Against Gay Marriages to provide his reasons for not supporting the cause. Thompson writes Argument to answer all the questions that activists ask but are never answered to, finally coming to say that gay-marriage is only a struggle with deeper motives, bad for the well being of our society and looked down upon by God. 


The most noticeable trait that Thompson puts onto the table is the dehumanizing of the word "homosexual", "gay" and "lesbian". The most obvious example in contained in the first paragraph where Thompson hints at the fact that homosexuals are aiming for something more than equality, saying "there is a deeper agenda at work here..." and he further pushes human qualities away from the terms when he goes into deeper detail and yet refuses to give a proper name to any homosexual and consistently using these terms until it sounds like he is talking about a species of animals that are pinning against "the well-being of our society.".


Secondly, Thompson proves his point by first using very frank language, thus achieving a very straight to the point tone. From the very start, he does not beat around the bush nor does he subtly imply anything. Instead, he takes the subject head on and pulls the reader in with short, stabbing sentences like "gay and lesbians already possess rights equally protected under the law. They have the exact rights that I have today. They can marry a member of the opposite sex if they so choose, just like I have done. " By using sentences that are short and somewhat rhythmic, Thompson is able to establish a sort of trust with the reader, not with his facts, but the fact that he will be honest with his opinion.


Details also contribute to Thompson's matter of factly tone, as he spits out sentence after sentence and connects them like points on a graph. He first starts out with any specific detail,"gay lobby encourages behavior deemed unacceptable by every major religion" then follows with a string of other facts that lead to a single, finite conclusion, " The truth of the matter is marriage is a sacred union ordained by God, and nothing man does can ever really change that." The details work not only to support his opinion but also to reinforce the trust established by Thompson.

These all work together to prove Thompson's point; that homosexuals should not have the right to marriage because they are already equal to another being and that any changes made by humanity towards the subject would not be successful.