Julian McDonald, a liberal congressman from California, intends to propose a law that will abolish marriage as a legal practice. In his book titled The Abolishment of Marriage he proposes that marriage as a legal contract should be all-together abolished, and if couples seek to practice this traditional custom it should be a non-legal ceremonial, religious based, act.
“Three major family trends imply that marriage has lost its value in society and for today’s culture,” says McDonald in a 2005 CNN interview. These three trends that congressman McDonald reveals are (1) high divorce rates, (2) high rates of cohabitation, and (3) rates of children born out of wedlock. According to McDonald, “high divorce rates demonstrate how little faith couples have in marriage by not seeking lifetime (long-term) commitment to the spouse.” McDonald bashes marriage by saying, “cohabitation is what couples nowadays prefer and its the intelligent way for people to get to know each other, even before opting for marriage.” McDonald continues bashing marriage when making the infamous comment, “since many children are born out-of-wedlock, they are legitimate (by law) bastards, so why marry?”
Do you agree with Congressman Julian McDonald or do you disagree? To propose your position it MUST be defended by ONE of the FOUR THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES; Functionalist Perspective, Conflict Theorist Perspective (which includes Feminist Perspective), Symbolic Interactionist Perspective, or Postmodernist Perspective.
Your position (agree / disagree) must be STRICTLY defended by one of the four theoretical perspectives.
APA Style Format with proper citation.
Clarity of your response.
Part 1- 4 page stating whether you agree or disagree- 4 full pages
These 4 pages should clearly say whether you agree or disagree to McDonald’s proposition, as well as defend your position per one of the five theoretical perspectives. You may choose functionalism, conflict theory, interactionism, feminism, or interactionism.
Part 2- Discussion Section – 1 full page
You can select from the following criteria to conclude your theoretical analysis in writing your discussion section. This section should be a full page. Choose ONLY ONE of the following conditions in writing this section:
1. Select an opposing perspective to the perspective you initially chose to defend your position in the theoretical section. Of course, you’ll have to learn all five of the perspectives to identify which perspective opposes to your initially selected perspective.
2. Discuss some of the limitations you encounter in selecting your perspective. Were the principles of your chosen perspective did not fully corresponded to your position to the subject (agreeing / disagreeing with McDonald)?
Give recommendations you would give to future researchers (students) who would assert with your views (both in your position to the subject and also your selected perspective).
