Unformatted text preview: assumes all the reasons that a couple would choose to become married. She assumes it would be for tax reasons. She also assumes that all readers subscribe to a religion when she states that marriage should be decided by different religions and not by the state. Essig does address opposing viewpoints effectively in the article in multiple places. This is most apparent in paragraph eleven where she states the opposing viewpoint clearly and then follows this with questions for the reader to consider. There are few fallacies within her essay. One would be a hasty generalization when she states that a huge number of marriages end in divorce and even those that are happy aren’t necessarily in paragraph eleven. Essig does provide a persuasive argument against marriage in general which is an interesting viewpoint with evidence that is rarely shown against the ritual of marriage....
View Full Document
- Spring '06
- Same-sex marriage, Syfrig Comprehensive Analysis