Analysis of Charles Colsons Essay on Gay Marriage

In his essay titled â€Å"Gay Marriage: Societal Suicide,† Charles Colson talks about his reasons for opposing same-sex marriage. The essays’ main argument is built around Colson’s belief that legalizing same-sex marriage would lead to the decoupling of marriage, and ultimately result in what he describes as: â€Å"an explosive increase in family collapse, out of wedlock births - and crime.† Colson shares his personal experiences as a prison minister, various studies, statistics, and real world examples to elucidate the reasons behind his controversial stance on marital rights. Although the essay provides a variety of different types of evidence to illustrate Colson’s position on the subject, it is through sharing his personal experiences from†¦show more content†¦To expatiate upon the latter part of his thesis, Colson enlightens the reader by sharing the events that took place in Norway following the legalization of same-sex marriage in 1993. Prior to the imposition of same-sex marriage, Colson states that, â€Å"Norwegians enjoyed low out of wedlock birth rate. After the imposition of same-sex marriage, Norway’s out of wedlock birth rate shot up as the link between marriage and child bearing was broken and cohabitation became the norm.† While indeed relevant to the argument, the out of wedlock birth rate statistic alone lacked the potency necessary to successfully persuade the reader of the threat imposed by legalizing same-sex marriage. The single specific statistic does not provide enough information to justify Colson’s claim that legalizing same sex marriage would result in family breakdown and criminal activity as suggested by his thesis. As a result, the statistic is largely inefficacious since it does not provide any additional background information to further illustrate that the spike in out of wedlock birth rates experienced by Norway was in fact, a direct result of the legalization of same-sex marriage. Consequently, this error in procedure leaves the premise of Colson’s argument vulnerable to scrutiny in addition to suggesting the presence of a post hoc fallacy, as he does not offer any reasons to rule out that the sequence of events detailed may be purely coincidental.