Andrew Sullivan Here Comes The Bedroom Summary
Analysis of Here Comes the Groom A lot of time is spent attempting to decide the legal definition of a domestic partnership. What is the definition of a loving, committed relationship and what is achieved by preventing non-traditional relationships from receiving legal rights? In the article “Here Comes the Groom: A Conservative Case for Gay Marriage,” Andrew Sullivan attempts to answer this question and makes a reasonable argument for promoting the legalization of gay marriage. This article was originally published in The New Republic in August 1989. The New Republic is a magazine that was founded in 1914 and covers current political topics. It is headquartered in Washington, DC. Andrew Sullivan has a doctorate from Harvard in political science. He was formerly the editor of The New Republic magazine and is a respected
…show more content…
Citing a recent court ruling that allowed a gay individual to stay in his partner’s rent controlled apartment after his partner passed away, thus qualifying the individual as a member of the deceased partner’s family, Sullivan uses many sagacious points that most readers can relate to. His choice of words and examples make it seem that he is passionate about this issue and the preservation of the family unit in general. Sullivan makes a prudent argument as to what could be gained by encouraging loving, committed relationships. Legalizing gay marriage would promote social acceptance, the same economic advantages and relationship security between two people who love one another. This would also encourage a deeper commitment that is harder to get out of. Also pointed out is that legalizing gay marriage would not jeopardize the legitimacy of traditional, straight marriage. Allowing the same rights to fellow individuals could only help to promote that which we all hold dear, family
Citing a recent court ruling that allowed a gay individual to stay in his partner’s rent controlled apartment after his partner passed away, thus qualifying the individual as a member of the deceased partner’s family, Sullivan uses many sagacious points that most readers can relate to. His choice of words and examples make it seem that he is passionate about this issue and the preservation of the family unit in general. Sullivan makes a prudent argument as to what could be gained by encouraging loving, committed relationships. Legalizing gay marriage would promote social acceptance, the same economic advantages and relationship security between two people who love one another. This would also encourage a deeper commitment that is harder to get out of. Also pointed out is that legalizing gay marriage would not jeopardize the legitimacy of traditional, straight marriage. Allowing the same rights to fellow individuals could only help to promote that which we all hold dear, family