Homosexual Marriage Should be legal in all US states and territories

Very well. Voters just vote for the better argument. For the record I am not personally against gay marriage, no need to get mad at me for my “position” in this debate. I am con in this debate and will play my role. 1: Marriage, Religion and Government Marriage has deep roots as a religious rite. As such in the United States anyone can marry anyone or anything else within their religion. The debate over legalizing same sex marriage rests on Marriage in relation to the Government. As such, the debate is over whether the government recognizes a marriage or not for legal purposes. I bring this up as an example that a same sex couple is perfectly able to marry each other. However, that does not mean that such a marriage is recognized by the State. Ergo, this debate rests on if the Government should recognize same sex marriage. 2: Marriage as a right Pro says of Homosexual marriage bans “It is still denying a group of people a fundamental right.” Marriage is not an unalienable right, rather it is a Inalienable right. “Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred."(1) “Inalienable rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights.”(1) “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”( Declaration of Independence) Our society is founded on the idea that governments are instituted to “secure” not to “grant” unalienable rights. In the U.S. every State requires a marriage license. This must be purchased and each State has requirements that must be met to acquire such a license. For example, A state may require… “A marriage license issued by the county clerk or clerk of the court (along with payment of a fee). Both man and woman are 18 or older, or have the consent of a parent or a judge if younger. Proof of immunity or vaccination for certain diseases Proof of the termination of any prior marriages by death, judgment of dissolution (divorce) or annulment.”(2) From this it is reasonable to conclude that Marriage is not viewed as an unalienable right in the U.S. Rather it is an Inalienable right. This is the case as being licensed requires being granted the right to do the licensed activity provided you meet the standards set by the State. I.E. Driving, or in this case, Marriage. “You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government.”(1) While Marriage may be a “fundamental right” that does not mean that it is unalienable. 3: Principles of our democracy Pro says “It is also in violation of the principles of democracy, as 55% of Americans agree with allowing gay marriage.” “What's important to remember is this: It's up to the states to decide who can and can't get married.”(3) In the State of Utah “57 percent of residents oppose same-sex marriage, while 36 percent support it and 6 percent are undecided, according to the survey conducted by longtime pollster Dan Jones & Associates/Cicero Group on Jan. 14-16. It has a plus or minus 3.6 percent margin of error.”(4) As marriage is left to the states it matters not if 55% of Americans are for same sex marriage if in individual States the majority are against it. My opponent seems to support the majority opinion as a reason to make something legal or illegal as he has sited it as a democratic principle. As such, democratically it is reasonable to conclude that if a majority of residents in any given State oppose same sex marriage, it would be reasonable to not recognize such a marriage. As is the case in Utah. 4: Examples given by Pro Pro says “If I made an argument that senior citizens should not have the right to free speech, women the right to privacy, people wearing blue shorts could not cross state lines, or brown haired people don’t have the right to bear arms you would laugh at the ridiculousness of my argument.” It should be noted that the “right” to free speech and privacy are unalienable rights, unlike marriage. I do not need a license for either. As far as the other examples, pro is right, I would laugh at the ridiculousness of his argument. 5: Conclusion This debate is about what “should” be done. What should be done is respect for democratic principles. State by State majorities can decide what should or should not be legal. As marriage is not recognized as an unalienable right, this is reasonable. Also, as each State has different requirements as to what qualifies one for a marriage license it is reasonable to allow each State the ability to determine the criteria to be met. Including defining marriage as between a man and a women if that is the case. Therefore if a majority in any given state, like Utah, deems same-sex marriage illegal. That should be respected. (1) http://unalienable.com... (2) http://usmarriagelaws.com... (3) http://www.huffingtonpost.com... (4) http://www.deseretnews.com...