Argument will be “no same sex marriage will not be accepted” For this assignment you will be revisiting your Module 2 discussion. You will be developing a counterargument for the position that you originally asserted as your thesis in the Module 2 discussion. If you argued that when we say the word “love” we mean “x”, then you must provide a counterargument for why that particular thesis or argument is incorrect or problematic. Remember, the argument you made can either be incorrect because the premises do not lead to the conclusion, one or more of your premises is false, or even why your conclusion/thesis leads to a contradiction or absurdity. Because the Module 2 assignment was a discussion, read through some of your classmates’ posts and the responses to get ideas of different perspectives and problems. These will help with identifying where some issues may lie. Also notice that this is typically how philosophy is done (through discussion and the Socratic Method). By discussing ideas with others that may have differing perspectives, we can recognize and be shown where problems occur that we may not be aware of. 
Your counterargument should be between 2-3 paragraphs in length and you must provide your counterargument in standard form at the top of your page. I have provided you with an example of what your assignment should look like below.
Sidenote
Notice how unhelpful discussion responses are that simply thank someone for their post or say what a good post someone wrote. Discussions, in a philosophical/Socratic Method sense, are meant to do a job. They are meant to provide new information, whether supportive or critical, to help us understand different perspectives or elements that can contribute to our better understanding of the topic. If I therefore make an argument for why something is the case, it is not helpful to get responses that thank me for asserting my position or that reiterate the exact point that I already made. What helps is critical analysis, or examples or anecdotes that support or counter my position from differing perspectives. This way I can understand how others see and address the problem and how they might tackle the issues pertaining to the topic.  
Requirements
2 paragraphs (acknowledging and outlining the counterargument and explaining why either it is insufficient or sufficient for overturning the original argument)
Standard form argument at the top of the page
Due by the end of the week (Sun. 11:59pm pst)