Navratilova Gay Marriage Analysis

The changes in perspective regarding gay marriage have lead to much debate and discussion amongst Australian citizens. Martina Navratilova has written an opinion piece regarding Margaret Court’s piece in the Herald Sun (01/27/12), “Don’t deny us same-sex marriage laws”. She contends that gay marriage is a question of “equality not religion” and that it is “immoral” to say no to gay marriage. Navratilova adopts a calm and assertive tone as she explains the injustices of “gender discrimination” to those who are against gay marriage.

Navratilova argues that it is “injustice” to not see homosexuals as equals. She begins her piece with an anecdote creating common ground with Court. She recalls how “privileged” she feel being the ball girl for

She begins her argument with an appeal to logic by stating that one does not need to be “Christian in order” to want to marry. Navratilova backs this up being questioning that atheists would not be “allowed to marry” otherwise. She outlines the fact that marriage is a “promise” to “love each other” and that we are denying homosexuals this gift love. Navratilova intends to make the audience see the illogic of saying that marriage is only a “religious celebration” meant for those who follow a faith. She continues her piece with another appeal to logic by proving that the Bible was “wrong” on previous “issues”. Navratilova points out that the Bible “justified slavery” and denied “women the right to vote” amongst other things. She describes how she believes that fundamentalists have been on the wrong side of the past “over and over again” and that she believes that they are once again on the “wrong side”. Navratilova aims to make the reader feel as if the Bible isn’t such a reliable source to determine what can be consider right and wrong. She uses both appeals to logic to strengthen her argument and to attempt to influence the audience into believing that marriage is more of a “contract” than a religious