That is why marrying with love is always encouraged. In my opinion, i think that both love and money is both necessary. Marriage relying on money would be rapidly disintegrated when unfortunately the money is run out. In contrary marriage relying on love would sometimes come to end when they could not earn money to carry out family (nc such as paying bills, buying food, etc. Therefore, love and money should stand together in marriage even though their contribution could be unbalanced (NC). As we have seen, marriage without either money or love would come to an unhappy ending. So i believe that they both have their own contribution to a merry family.
M Argument essays, graphs, other writing, and
Nowadays, money is one of the most significant materials in summary our lives. To many people, it is appropriate to marry for money rather than love. However, i believe that both love and money should be bouncetogether in any marriages. Certainly, money is an important part in our lives. It is hard for any persons to accept a partner which* does not have money or at least a job to take care of future family. Hence, said marry for money also has its right in some extent. However, love should be the root of any marriages. Firstly, it is because love is such a glue to connect two persons which have their own lives, become one (NC). So, they can share each others the sadness, happiness to overcome any difficulties in daily lives. Moreover, love makes people growing up because they do not only have responsibility to themselves, but also to their partners as well.
Is that how you feel, too? Keep reading then, because we are just about to analyse a band.5 essay and show you what to change in it, to get a band 8 score in ielts. Colours show elements relating to each criterion that affect the band Score of this sample ielts essay. Hold mouse over highlighted words (or tap on mobile) to see the comments, suggestions and corrections. Ielts essay analysed and Rewritten from Band.5 to band. Ielts essay topic: Some say you should always marry for love; others say that in an uncertain world it is wiser to marry for money. Discuss both write points of view and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience. Ielts sample Essay task response, coherence and Cohesion and Lexical Resource Analysis.
Ielts writing sample essay 24, ielts writing sample essay 25, ielts writing sample essay. Note: the essays are checked by an ielts teacher, not an ielts examiner or examiner l the bands are approximate. How to write an ielts band 8 Essay. Essay samples are useful to get an idea hotel what a band 8 essay looks like, but how can you write a band 8 essay? As you know, an ielts essay is scored using 4 criteria:. Coherence and Cohesion. Grammatical Range and Accuracy, many test takers are unsure what is wrong with their essay, why they book keep scoring Band.5 and how to take their writing to band 8 level.
Ielts writing sample essay 3, ielts writing sample essay 4, ielts writing sample essay. Ielts writing sample essay 6, ielts writing sample essay 7, ielts writing sample essay. Ielts writing sample essay 9, ielts writing sample essay 10, ielts writing sample essay. Ielts writing sample essay 12, ielts writing sample essay 13, ielts writing sample essay. Ielts writing sample essay 15, ielts writing sample essay 16, ielts writing sample essay. Ielts writing sample essay 18, ielts writing sample essay 19, ielts writing sample essay. Ielts writing sample essay 21, ielts writing sample essay 22, ielts writing sample essay.
Com - esl, essay writing, sample, essay
Its time to legalize polygamy. conventional arguments against polygamy fall apart with even a little examination. Appeals to traditional marriage, and the notion that child rearing is the only legitimate justification of legal marriage, have now, i hope, been exposed and discarded by all progressive people. Whats left is a series of jerry-rigged arguments that reflect no coherent moral vision of what marriage is for, and which frequently function as criticisms of traditional marriage as well. Fredrik deboer is a writer and academic. He lives in Indiana.
This article tagged under. Here you can find ielts essay samples of Band 8, written by students and graded by an ielts teacher. Last updated: August 3, 2018, the topic of each essay appears when you hold the mouse over the link. Every essay is checked, marked, has comments and suggestions. Hold the mouse over to see suggested corrections. The teachers summary is at the bottom of each essay. Ielts writing latin sample essay 1, ielts writing sample essay.
Rather, its that the tactics of that movement have made getting to serious discussions of legalized polygamy harder. I say that while recognizing the unprecedented and necessary success of those tactics. I understand the political pragmatism in wanting to hold the line—to not be perceived to be slipping down the slope. To advocate for polygamy during the marriage equality fight may have seemed to confirm the socially conservative narrative, that gay marriage augured a wholesale collapse in traditional values. But times have changed; while work remains to be done, the immediate danger to marriage equality has passed.
In 2005, a denial of the right to group marriage stemming from political pragmatism made at least some sense. In 2015, after this ruling, it no longer does. While important legal and practical questions remain unresolved, with the supreme courts ruling and broad public support, marriage equality is here to stay. Soon, it will be time to turn the attention of social liberalism to the next horizon. Given that many of us have argued, to great effect, that deference to tradition is not a legitimate reason to restrict marriage rights to groups that want them, the next step seems clear. We should turn our efforts towards the legal recognition of marriages between more than two partners.
Essay writing (Othello)
But the marriage equality movement has been curiously hostile to polygamy, and for a particularly unsatisfying reason: short-term political need. Many conservative opponents of marriage equality have made the slippery slope argument, insisting that same-sex marriages would lead inevitably to further redefinition of what marriage is and means. See, for example, rick santorums infamous man on dog comments, in which he equated the desire of two adult men or women to be married with bestiality. Polygamy has frequently been a part of these slippery slope arguments. Typical of such arguments, business the reasons why marriage between more than two partners would be destructive were taken as a given. Many proponents of marriage equality, im sorry to say, went along with this evidence-free indictment of polygamous matrimony. They choose to side-step the issue by insisting that gay marriage wouldnt lead to polygamy. That legally sanctioned polygamy was a fate worth fearing went without saying. To be clear: our lack of legal recognition of group marriages is not the fault of the marriage equality movement.
I think the answer has to do with political momentum, with a kind of ad hoc-rejection of polygamy as necessary political concession. And in time, i think it will change. The marriage equality movement has been both the best and worst thing that could happen for legally sanctioned polygamy. The best, because that movement has required a sustained and effective assault on traditional marriage arguments that reflected no particular point of view other than that marriage should stay the same because its always been the same. In particular, the notion that procreation and child-rearing are the natural justification for marriage has been dealt a terminal writing injury. We dont, after all, ban marriage for those who cant conceive, or annul marriages that dont result in children, or make couples pinkie swear that theyll have kids not too long after they get married. We have insisted instead that the institution exists to enshrine in law a special kind of long-term commitment, and to extend certain essential logistical and legal benefits to those who make that commitment.
the marriage in question. If my liberal friends recognize the legitimacy of free people who choose to form romantic partnerships with multiple partners, how can they deny them the right to the legal protections marriage affords? Polyamory is a fact. People are living in group relationships today. The question is not whether they will continue on in those relationships. The question is whether we will grant to them the same basic recognition we grant to other adults: that love makes marriage, and that the right to marry is exactly that, a right. Why the opposition, from those who have no interest in preserving traditional marriage or forbidding polyamorous relationships?
As is often the case with critics of polygamy, he neglects to mention why this is a fate to be feared. Polygamy today stands as a taboo just as strong as same-sex marriage was several decades ago—its effectively only discussed as outdated jokes about Utah and Mormons, who banned the practice over 120 years ago. Yet the moral reasoning behind societys rejection of polygamy remains just as uncomfortable and legally weak as same-sex marriage opposition teresa was until recently. Thats one reason why progressives who reject the case for legal polygamy often dont really appear to have their hearts. They seem uncomfortable voicing their objections, clearly unused to being in the position of rejecting the appeals of those who would codify non-traditional relationships in law. They are, without exception, accepting of the right of consenting adults to engage in whatever sexual and romantic relationships they choose, but oppose the formal, legal recognition of those relationships. Theyre trapped, i suspect, in prior opposition that they voiced from a standpoint of political pragmatism in order to advance the cause of gay marriage.
Ielts, writing, task 2: positive or negative essay - ielts
Welcome to the exciting new world of the slippery slope. With the supreme courts landmark ruling this Friday legalizing same sex marriage in all 50 states, social liberalism has achieved one of its central goals. A right seemingly unthinkable two decades ago has now been broadly applied to a whole new class of citizens. Following on the rejection of interracial marriage bans in the 20th Century, the supreme court decision clearly summary shows that marriage should be a broadly applicable right—one that forces the government to recognize, as Fridays decision said, a private couples love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice and family. The question presents itself: Where does the next advance come? The answer is going to make nearly everyone uncomfortable: Now that weve defined that love and devotion and family isnt driven by gender alone, why should it be limited to just two individuals? The most natural advance next for marriage lies in legalized polygamy—yet many of the same people who pressed for marriage equality for gay couples oppose. Story continued Below, this is not an abstract issue. In Chief Justice john Roberts dissenting opinion, he remarks, It is striking how much of the majoritys reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage.