Play Devil's Advocate--Once more!

Okay, now, onto the arguments.1. It's not normalI mean, even in a Supreme court case ruling Baker v. Nelson it was decided that "The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.” [1] Moreover, in a statement from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, marriage "was established by the Creator with its own nature, essential properties and purpose. No ideology can erase from the human spirit the certainty that marriage exists solely between a man and a woman…” [10] It is because of such non-belief that many churches dislike the idea of gay marriage. It would be tough to convince so many churches to change their beliefs, especially since they now have to teach that gay people are equal to heterosexuals, which completely goes against the bible. [10] 2. Other weird marriagesIt could give potential bestial, polygamous, or even incestuous relationships to the right of marriage. In April 2013, Slate published a plea for legal polygamy stating: "Just like heterosexual marriage is no better or worse than homosexual marriage, marriage between two consenting adults is not inherently more or less 'correct' than marriage among three (or four, or six) consenting adults." [2] Furthremore, some senior counsel named Glen Lavy said in a May 21, 2008 Los Angeles Times Op-Ed, "The movement for polygamy and polyamory is poised to use the successes of same-sex couples as a springboard for further de-institutionalizing marriage." [3]3. People believe gay is wrong, why force them to pay taxes to support gay people?Gay marriage gives gay couples many marriage benefits which are mostly paid by the tax the government recieves. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the federal government extending employment benefits to same-sex domestic partners of certain federal employees (making no mention of additional costs such as inheritance taxes or Social Security) would cost up to $596 million in mandatory spending and $302 million in discretionary spending in just 9 years. [4]4. Gay parents can't take care of their children Children are deprived of the good advice and emotional security without a mother. An Apr. 2001 study published in American Sociological Review suggesed that children with gay or lesbian parents are more likely to engage in homosexual behavior. [5] In addition, girls who don't have the help of their fathers are reportedly at higher risk for as well as early sexual activity. [6] Not only that, in the book Growing up in a Lesbian Family: Effects on Child Development by Fiona Tasker and Susan Golombok, it was observed that compared to 0% of sampled young adults raised by heterosexual mothers, 25% of sampled young adults raised by lesbian mothers had engaged in a homoerotic relationship. [7] 5. It's destroying normal marriage as we know itA few examples are Sweden, Denmark, and Norway, which all legalized marriage in the 1990's. According to a report by Stanley Kurtz, from 1990 to 2000, Norway's birthrate from people whom were not married to each other went from 39% to 50% and Sweden's from 47% to 55%. Unmarried parenthood in Denmark rose 25% during the 1990s, and almost 60% of first born Danish children have unmarried parents. As Kurtz states himself, "Marriage is slowly dying in Scandinavia." [8]6. Shifting normal "goal" for marriageMarriage is supposed to mean about producing and raising child. But if gay people marry they can't produce children and only encourage to change the purpose of marriage to the other purpose of purely "getting it on" for fun. [9] 7. Civil Unions are betterSeriously. They give the same benefits of marriage without actually marrying. And people are liking it much better than gay marriage... [11] [12] [13] And with that, I conclude my round. The research has been quite tough, but I now see the other side of gay marriage and why some people don't want it. However, my original opinion remains still sturdily unchanged, which means I'm still playing devil's advocate.Well, anyhow, onto you, con. [1] Bruce Peterson, JD, Majority Opinion, Baker v. Nelson, www.marriagelawfoundation.org[2] http://v.gd...[3] http://www.latimes.com...[4] Amber G. Marcellino, et al., "Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate H.R. 2517", www.cbo.gov[5] Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz, "(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?," American Sociological Review[6] Bruce J. Ellis, "Does Father Absence Place Daughters at Special Risk for Early Sexual Activity and Teenage Pregnancy?"[7] Fiona Tasker, PhD, and Susan Golombok, PhD, Growing Up in a Lesbian Family: Effects of Child Development, 1997[8] http://www.weeklystandard.com...[9] http://v.gd...[10] Joseph Card. Ratzinger, "Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons", www.vatican.va[11] http://v.gd...[12] http://www.gallup.com...[13] http://www.texastribune.org...