Analysis Of John Rawls Still Separate, Still Unequal

1518 Words 7 Pages
A principle serves it purpose as a system of belief or behavior. In this case philosopher John Rawls proposes a theory in which he believes justice should be fair, this not meaning it is being perceived by the following texts, "Still Separate, Still Unequal" by Jonathan Kozol, "Rethinking Affirmative Action" by David Leonhardt, and "Gay Marriage: Sidestep on Freedom 's Path" by Alexander Cockburn. It is clear that these three essays do not display any attachment to John Rawls 's principles, they are unrealized and oppositely argued within the present-day social and political arena. The reversed notions in these texts are through the inequality of race among divided schools, support of affirmative action which disadvantages the white race, …show more content…
This is exhibited in the quotation: " Assimilation is not liberation, and the invocation of "equality" as the great attainment of these gay marriages should be challenged" (Cockburn). The ability to spend the rest of your life with the person you love is a choice of either, officially marking that bond though state marriage or refraining from it keeping bond a live bond. Any person apart of the LGBT community is seen with less authority for a reason not understood. Connecting towards the principles of John Rawls, gay people are placed as minorities in most states throughout the United States. It is unjust for any persons human rights to be set aside as less because of their gender. No gay marriage has equal opportunity or same rights unlike blessed heterosexual couples, people have conformed to the notion that same sex marriage is a diversion from a different sex union. Cockburn continues on the subject with the statement:" There 's a fork in the road for progressives. One path is sameness, expanding a troubled institution to same-sexers. But that path detours the real problems of relationships today and their official recognition" (Cockburn). Apparently it is up to the government to respect and validate the choices any person makes marriage-wise. Being a part of the LGBT community means that marrying your loved one is living a life of "sin", as officials still use biased beliefs from the bible as their guidance for what is correct as civil activity. Having the inability to marry the person of one 's choice has its unbeneficial toll, this meaning being refrained from an additional hundreds or thousands of dollars in employee compensation. The question is risen to why should any form

Related Documents