An Analysis of Alexandria Sages Article on Gay Marriage - Essay Example

An Analysis of Alexandria Sage’s Article on Gay Marriage Alexandria Sage’s article on gay marriage aims to present the arguments of those who opposeand those who advocate the passage of Proposition 8 in California. Sage aims to present that for advocates of Proposition 8, they argue that the latter is not discriminatory against the gays and lesbians; they emphasize that “gays and lesbians have ample political power, with key politicians backing their goals, including same sex marriage” (Sage). Sage also emphasizes in her article that for opponents of Proposition 8, they question whether or not the US government and the US voters have a “reasonable justification for denying same-sex marriage, such as promoting healthier families, or if the bans reflect discrimination and hatred” (Sage). Sage runs down the various arguments and criticisms on the gay marriage issue by citing events which have unfolded since the passage of Proposition 8 and the events that has unfolded since. She also used quoted statements from government officials and other experts on the subject matter in order to comprehensively present the current issue. Sage begins her article by making a clear statement about the fact that gays and lesbians in California do have sufficient political support for their cause – from their Governor to the entire Democratic Party. From this initial statement alone, Sage establishes a serious and formal tone in her essay. This is a good way to capture the reader’s interest because it catches the attention of those who oppose and those who advocate gay marriage in California. From the onset, the opening statement shows the status of the hearing on Proposition 8 and it reveals undeniable truths for both interest groups in this paper. Both sides cannot deny that the Governor and the Democrat Party is indeed politically supportive of gay marriage and gay rights in California. Hence, the statement draws in opponents and advocates alike who have a clear stake on the resolution of the gay marriage issue. Moreover, this opening statement by Sage is used as information for the first point that the author wants to make in the current issue – that there is no discrimination of gay and lesbian rights with the approval of Proposition 8. The formal tone used by the author is very much appropriate for this paper because the topic calls for a serious discussion on the subject matter. Considering the fact that gay marriage is a very controversial issue, the author has given the topic a very respectful and formal tone in order for the reader to take the topic more seriously. The formal tone of the paper made the contents of the essay very much believable and credible. Through the author’s formal tone, the author was able to prove that she was able to gather important information about the subject matter and that she wants the reader to believe such information. This tone made me appreciate the author’s research process in accomplishing the paper. The formal tone of the paper made me more critical about the issue. Before reading the essay, gay marriage was an issue which I felt did not concern me. However, after reading the article, I was enticed to take a closer look on the gay marriage issue and to make my own assessment and position on the topic. The author presents formal statements from interest groups who have a stake on this issue. The author cites cases of gays and lesbians who are allowed to run for and be nominated into public office; and the fact that “gays are not systematically discriminated against” (Sage). The article also points out how much money has been raised by either side in order to ensure support for their positions; and that more money has been spent and raised by those who are opposing Proposition 8. The author quoted a professor who testified in the Prop 8 trials when she said, “[i]t was striking to me the amount of money raised on both sides of the election. Forty-three million dollars was raised and spent by the opponents of Prop 8 which exceeded very large expenditures by the Yes on 8 Campaign” (Sage). On one side of the argument, those who supported the passage of Proposition 8 emphasize that their support for Prop 8 is not about discrimination; they pointed out that gays and lesbians also have political rights and political power, even despite the ban or disagreement on gay marriage. On the other side of the argument, those who oppose Prop 8 claim that not allowing gay people to marry is a clear sign of discrimination. The claims made by the author are based on facts because she partly presents a history of events which have already occurred in the current gay marriage issue. The author even cites actual statements of people who are involved in the trials resolving the gay marriage issue. The words used by the author were not technical, but they were sufficient to express a clear understanding of the subject matter. The words which were not common knowledge were explained properly by the author from the very beginning in order to ensure that the reader would be able to understand and follow the discussion. In the second sentence, the author explains what Proposition 8 is all about. She does not assume that her audience is already familiar with the current issue. Moreover, she also takes time to lay out the arguments presented by advocates on both sides of the issue. She points out in an organized manner the sequence of events which have already unfolded in relation to the gay marriage issue. And by laying these events and arguments simply and clearly, the audience is easily engaged in more than just reading, but also in taking a more participative stance on the issue. As a reader and as a member of the audience, I was sufficiently enticed to read and believe the contents of the essay because of the statements that the author was able to include from known personalities engaging in the current issue. Some of the statements she cited are however not formally credited to certain individuals; hence some of these statements cannot be adequately verified for accuracy. Example is the following statement, “[t]wo gay men and two lesbian women have asked the federal court to rule that the right to marry has no exceptions under the U.S. Constitution. It is a fight some are betting will go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in a bid to overturn bans on same-sex marriage in 40 states” (Sage). The two gay men and two lesbian women are vague sources of information which have to be verified for this paper. Her arguments on the non-discriminatory nature of Prop 8 have also not been reasonably established in her paper. The claims of her paper are too crucial to the settlement of the gay marriage issue that they cannot be left to vague statements. In order to further back up the author’s arguments, there is perhaps a need for more statistics and more factual events to be cited by the author. Even if I believe some of the author’s statements, I still need more facts proving the non-discriminatory nature of Proposition 8 before I can be swayed into a similar frame of mind. The author provides important details which can be checked in other newspapers and other discussions on the subject matter. Although the author does not firmly convince me that Prop 8 is non-discriminatory, she still provides me with possible directions and sources of information on the subject matter. She was able to start something in her analysis which I am willing to further explore as a reader and as an interested party to the controversy. The essay generally discusses the fact that the passage of Proposition 8 does not necessarily mean discrimination against gays and lesbians in California. This statement is an argumentative thesis which makes a qualifiable assertion. It is an argument or a statement about a moral, aesthetic, or philosophical topic. The qualifiable statement in this paper is on whether or not the passage of Proposition 8 is discriminatory against gays and lesbians. The assessment of the argument as presented by Sage seeks an evaluation of an issue which for some people is a moral issue and to others a philosophical issue. For a complete understanding of the author’s claims, we must examine the following underlying assumptions: that Proposition 8 is a ballot which is backed by voters in 2008 to end gay marriage in California; that Prop 8 is currently being reevaluated through efforts being made by those who oppose it; that Prop 8 proponents argue that opposing gay marriage does not mean opposing all the rights of gays and lesbians who still enjoy other rights – especially political offices, same as other people; and that Prop 8 oppositionists believe that Prop 8 discriminates against all people’s right to marry. The first two assumptions are authoritative assumptions because they are based on sources which the audience already believes. The audience believes the author’s sources because these sources are known personalities who have made their position on gay marriage clear. On the third and fourth assumptions, these are considered to be motivational warrants or assumptions because are based on emotions, attitudes, and values evoked by the arguments presented by the issue. Based on the article, I can make a fair assessment that the author values the fair presentation of both sides of the issue. It is clear from the paper that she was not concerned with taking any sides on the issue. She was just concerned in laying out the facts of those arguing for and those arguing against gay marriage. She presents both sides equally and objectively. She does not present one side over the other, but she presents what either side is saying about his position on the issue. Since the research does not have any works cited or reference page, it is difficult to evaluate the author’s sources. However, I was able to easily check her statements by making my own internet search using the statements of people she quoted. Consequently, I was able to verify all the claims she discussed or included in her essay. Since most of the materials and quotes she used were verified through an independent library and internet search, it is wise to say that all statements which are needed in order to make a fair assessment of the issue are made available to the reader. The reader can actually make a position on the issue based on this paper alone. The verified claims of the paper affected the credibility of the paper’s claims. Her claims were more credible and more comprehensive. The author did not use logical fallacies in her reasoning and in her writing process. The claims that the author was able to make followed clear logic and were also supported by statements from experts on the subject matter. All the statements are based on credible statements of individuals who have sufficient expertise and involvement in the issue. Such individuals include associate professor of government Kenneth Miller who was one of the witnesses called on to testify during the Proposition 8 trials; presiding judge of the Proposition 8 trials, Vaughn Walker; Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who are staunch oppositionists of Proposition 8. Conclusion This reader was able to establish that author Alexanidria Sage used a formal diction and tone on her paper in an attempt to clearly express the seriousness of the topic. Her formal tone was used through formal and legal statements used by both proponents and opponents of Proposition 8. This formal diction enhanced the presentation of the author’s ideas and also the people’s understanding and attitude towards the paper. The author was very much concerned in keeping her objectivity in the presentation of her ideas and of both sides of the issue. The author’s claims are sound and credible ideas because they point out that Proposition 8 is not discriminatory against gays and lesbians because it has many political supporters. And yet the essay also logically points out that gays and lesbians are still discriminated against in the military and in high-level politics, thereby refuting the statement that gays and lesbians are not discriminated against in the government. No logical fallacies were seen in this paper as clear logical progression of ideas was followed by the author by first presenting that with the Governor, the Democratic Party, and with the millions of dollars raised in an effort to oppose Proposition 8, there is sufficient support for gays and lesbians in the political arena. All in all, I am a comfortable reader of this paper. It is a very relatable and logical paper which entices me to find out more about the issue and to be more critical about the ideas it is presenting. Reference Sage, California. “California gay marriage opponents argue no discrimination”. Reuters. 25 January 2010. 04 February 2010. . Read More