Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Comparing and Contrasting Sullivan and Essig
Andrew Sullivan the author of the article in Times magazine, grew up in a conservative, catholic and middle class family. It was a society that was defined by strict moral codes on the importance of marriage. Marriage has been epitomized as the definition of success in a man. This article talking on same sex marriages and love that also exist in that lifestyle has frustrated the societal expectations. The definition of love has been clearly defined in that conservative society. This article advocates for same-marriage recognition in the society. It pleads with the society to accept teen kids that are gay and integrate them in the society with the same level of love shown to the heterosexuals.
Laurie Essig and Lynn Owens have written the article on marriage. They pose to ask whether marriage is a universal human need. This article seeks to know whether marriage is an essential attribute in life that guarantees everyone happiness. This article takes the reader with the traditional claims why marriage is essentially good to everyone. It further takes the reader though those segments of society from conservative, political to progressive advocacy groups that have tried to heighten those traditional beliefs.
Both articles refer to the archaic reasons that forced one to get married. The first article notes that often people got married to make their family and friends happy. The second article refuses the claims that married people are healthier. It notes that the married and married are both similar. Infect it notes that the divorced are worse. In essence, the lesson learnt from that context is that one should not marry at all. They both agree that people should engage in married life because of personal beliefs rather than to conform to the traditional customs.
Both article notes that single people are scorned in the society. It is clear that the ultimate happiness can only happen when one is married. As a result Sullivan from his article decides to isolate himself from his friends and family. This is because the author refuses to conform to their popular belief on marriage and decides to live his life. Infact he advocates for same-sex marriage. This is to show that heterosexual marriage is not the only valid marriage. He was a gay man whose moral beliefs and personal values were abhorred by the society. The second article notes that married people are the most isolated. There is more isolation from families and friends. It notes that human beings need more than marriage.
Both first and second articles note that marriage has changed over the years. It is clear that the traditional beliefs do not define marriage anymore. The first article is advocating for same-sex marriage. This was formally not acceptable but changes in the social structure and recognition of basic rights has made this possible. The second article pointedly talks of a “domestic gulag”, can be a forced labor camp. This talks of mates in marriage that spend a lot of their time to work on their failing marriages.
The first and second article differs on the significance of marriage. The first article advocates for same-sex marriage. It talks of the importance of family and integration in the society. The second article in essence concludes that marriage is not meant for everyone. That to some people marriage will only add more pain and misery. The second article declares that marriage is not meant for everyone after all.