Ashley Arcidiacono
Outline Paper 1
Note: Not all quotes will be used. They are just a justification for the points that I have chosen to describe as Calhoun’s main topics from DOMA and her argument. Also, anything highlighted in yellow suggests some sort of uncertainty about the claim I make.
DOMA Argument:
1. Heterosexual marriage is a pre-political foundation for society.
• The state does not create marriage. It exists logically prior to the state, since it is the basis for any society.
• The state depends crucially on marriage for its existence, so it must recognize it.
• “It means that if a social group can lay claim to being inherently qualified or fit to enter into marriage and found a family, it can also claim a distinctive political …show more content…
The obvious answer is that homosexuality is immoral. thus cheapening its status… The central concern instead seemed to be that recognizing same-sex unions as marriages would demote marriage from a naturally defined prepolitical institution to a state-defined contract” (165)
2. There exist a specific group who are seen as fit for establishing the foundation of society. These groups should have a special status.
• Those who are seen as “unfit” in upholding this foundational institution and are therefore “inessential citizens” (164).
• “Whatever social contribution they might make to civil society depends on the antecedent marital and familial labor of others” (164).
3. Homosexuals are not “essential citizens” in that they cannot uphold this foundational relationship
4. Same-sex relationships are not simply a “lifestyle choice”
• To say that a particular form of relationship is a ‘lifestyle choice’, then, is simply to say that it falls within the category of relationships with respect to which state neutrality is appropriate. (166)
Calhoun’s argument:
1. Two choices:
A. Marriage as pre-political institution, but must include gays in societal …show more content…
As a result, heterosexuals can claim for their own relationships not just moral superiority, but a uniquely privileged status beyond the reach of liberal political values. (167)
4. So same-sex marriage should be legal.
My View
• Marriage is an important institution in that it preserves order and promotes intimacy
• Prepolitical in that it is the cornerstone of a functioning society (without, anarchy would ensue)
• Government can not rule on marriage unless egregious mishandling of power o THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN SOCIETY! We are valuing certain citizens above others and making moral judgments on their relationships (the govt. cannot do this) o THUS, gay marriage must be legalized in order to deem equality amongst citizens
Objection:
If we change the identity of gays to essential, we must also change the identity of polygamists to essential
• NO
• There is an interest in preserving oneness and intimacy between only TWO people
• How can I expand on
Outline Paper 1
Note: Not all quotes will be used. They are just a justification for the points that I have chosen to describe as Calhoun’s main topics from DOMA and her argument. Also, anything highlighted in yellow suggests some sort of uncertainty about the claim I make.
DOMA Argument:
1. Heterosexual marriage is a pre-political foundation for society.
• The state does not create marriage. It exists logically prior to the state, since it is the basis for any society.
• The state depends crucially on marriage for its existence, so it must recognize it.
• “It means that if a social group can lay claim to being inherently qualified or fit to enter into marriage and found a family, it can also claim a distinctive political …show more content…
The obvious answer is that homosexuality is immoral. thus cheapening its status… The central concern instead seemed to be that recognizing same-sex unions as marriages would demote marriage from a naturally defined prepolitical institution to a state-defined contract” (165)
2. There exist a specific group who are seen as fit for establishing the foundation of society. These groups should have a special status.
• Those who are seen as “unfit” in upholding this foundational institution and are therefore “inessential citizens” (164).
• “Whatever social contribution they might make to civil society depends on the antecedent marital and familial labor of others” (164).
3. Homosexuals are not “essential citizens” in that they cannot uphold this foundational relationship
4. Same-sex relationships are not simply a “lifestyle choice”
• To say that a particular form of relationship is a ‘lifestyle choice’, then, is simply to say that it falls within the category of relationships with respect to which state neutrality is appropriate. (166)
Calhoun’s argument:
1. Two choices:
A. Marriage as pre-political institution, but must include gays in societal …show more content…
As a result, heterosexuals can claim for their own relationships not just moral superiority, but a uniquely privileged status beyond the reach of liberal political values. (167)
4. So same-sex marriage should be legal.
My View
• Marriage is an important institution in that it preserves order and promotes intimacy
• Prepolitical in that it is the cornerstone of a functioning society (without, anarchy would ensue)
• Government can not rule on marriage unless egregious mishandling of power o THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN SOCIETY! We are valuing certain citizens above others and making moral judgments on their relationships (the govt. cannot do this) o THUS, gay marriage must be legalized in order to deem equality amongst citizens
Objection:
If we change the identity of gays to essential, we must also change the identity of polygamists to essential
• NO
• There is an interest in preserving oneness and intimacy between only TWO people
• How can I expand on