When a wedding comes around, it has become customary for the couple to provide a “Wedding Wish Box” at the ceremony. All the invited guests provide the newlywed couple with their best wishes and advice for their marriage. This ritual assumes that there is one perfect way to uphold your marriage, and believe me, everyone has something to say about which marriage is the “right” marriage. Fawn Weaver, writer of the Happy Wives Club, says that the secret to a happy marriage is actually not a secret at all. It is mutual respect that leads to trust and culminates into the daily choice to be happy together. (Weaver 2014). When the institution of marriage is thought of in this sense, then there are many different lifestyles that partners can enjoy.
…show more content…
Kurtz goes into great detail and explanations of reactions of certain countries, religious groups and internet blogs. Many statistics of bi-sexual and gay marriages were used to exemplify the consequences these marriages and how they would result in a devastating slippery slope towards plural marriages. It is important to note, that Kurtz completely disregarded the actual question at hand. In the case that a couple decides to have an open marriage, they are merely expressing their sexual desires with other partners. The couple in our textbook, “Taking Sides,” pronounced that they were happily married for thirty years and were just in need of a sexual outlet. In none of the examples, was the want for another marriage partner expressed.
Another aspect of Kurtz argument that needs to be addressed is his profound trust in the inevitability of the slippery slope. The slippery slope or the domino effect is a common logical fallacy used to prohibit actions that might cascade into a series of undesired results (Fallacy List). During the arguments claiming open marriages would lead to plural marriages, skewed evidence was used to explain why society would slip down the slope. All his evidence was based on different situations and different marital circumstances, rather than the actual interactions of open marriage
Kurtz goes into great detail and explanations of reactions of certain countries, religious groups and internet blogs. Many statistics of bi-sexual and gay marriages were used to exemplify the consequences these marriages and how they would result in a devastating slippery slope towards plural marriages. It is important to note, that Kurtz completely disregarded the actual question at hand. In the case that a couple decides to have an open marriage, they are merely expressing their sexual desires with other partners. The couple in our textbook, “Taking Sides,” pronounced that they were happily married for thirty years and were just in need of a sexual outlet. In none of the examples, was the want for another marriage partner expressed.
Another aspect of Kurtz argument that needs to be addressed is his profound trust in the inevitability of the slippery slope. The slippery slope or the domino effect is a common logical fallacy used to prohibit actions that might cascade into a series of undesired results (Fallacy List). During the arguments claiming open marriages would lead to plural marriages, skewed evidence was used to explain why society would slip down the slope. All his evidence was based on different situations and different marital circumstances, rather than the actual interactions of open marriage