In Defense Of Traditional Marriage
Gisela Ascanio
PHI 103 Informal Logic
Noel Sauer
2 July 2015

We are going to discuss the article “in defense of traditional marriage.” In addition we will go over the argument that was addressed, the conclusion and premises we found to support it as well as explain whether it was a deductive or inductive component. Then, we will have a counterargument, with the original argument presented, provide conclusion, premises and define whether it was a inductive/deductive component and why.

In the article “In defense of traditional marriage” it talks about upholding the traditional sense of marriage between a man and a woman. To keep the sacred bond between a man and a woman who will be bear children and raise them together in the union that the government and god acknowledges as marriage. The reason this is being brought up is because same sex unions are requesting that their partnerships be acknowledged as marriage and it be redefined in a sense so when they get married they too will receive the same benefits a man and wife would. Next, we will be going over the argument in the article.
After reading the article, it’s easy to notice the writer is very traditional and not so open minded to the possibilities of what has been presented, to give same sex marriage the same meaning and rights of a heterosexual marriage. In the writer’s eyes the reason marriage exists is to bring a man and woman together to become a mother and father to the children that come from their union. He feels that not only do you biologically require a man and woman to create a child but also, that social society requires that children need a mother and father; in addition that children with both a mother and father tend to do best. This writer is definitely biased and not open-minded to the possibility of acknowledging same sex marriage or even the possibility