Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on "Option Four" By Ramesh Ponnuru: Review. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
3 pages in length. Today, in the seventh year of the twenty-first century, the social, economic and moral battle continues to rage over gay marriage - a concept author Ramesh Ponnuru sees as a debate that is missing one pertinent option for a compromising resolution. His article entitled "Option Four: A Compromise on Gay Marriage" strives to illustrate both the soundness and fallibility of each side and ultimately offer a fourth option to the standard three that are routinely rejected. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: LM1_TLCGayOption.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
that is missing one pertinent option for a compromising resolution. His article entitled "Option Four: A Compromise on Gay Marriage" strives to illustrate both the soundness and fallibility of
each side and ultimately offer a fourth option to the standard three that are routinely rejected. Balanced and insightful, Ponnuru (2005) provides equal time to each side of the argument,
clearly documenting why all of the standard three options have failed to offer a satisfactory resolution. For example, he tries to draw a common denominator of inefficacy between opposing
sides by pointing out a number of negating aspects that serve more to befuddle than to provide clarity, as in the disagreement pertaining to hospital visitation rights and implied benefits.
"Obviously, this concern is connected to the argument about equality: If committed same-sex couples are morally equivalent to married couples, then why should they not have the same legal
protection?" (Ponnuru, 2005, p. 38). II. MOST IMPORTANT EXAMPLES Some of the most important examples that support Ponnurus (2005) main idea include distinguishing between the need for government blessing
- also known as involvement - in order to push through the idea of accepting gay marriage as socially acceptable. If government plays a role in mandating its recognition
as a union, will it automatically segue into an issue of rights that have been heretofore reserved only for tradition, heterosexual couples? How far will the line be pushed
once the door is open, and will the debate forever open new doors for further dispute once one issue has been resolved? Ponnuru (2005) discusses the notion of benefits and
whether or not they are equal to or greater than the idea of recognition. Should there be one or the other, or should one not exist without the other?
...