Same Sex Marriage

Before I continue, I wish to make it clear why I listed the "religious" and "unnatural" reasons in round 1. This was not a debate pointed at my opponent, it was an open debate and I did not know who would take up the challenge, I only wanted to disprove the ridiculous arguments that I have seen in the media and from many prominent pro-life members. My opponent brings up very fair points, notably which we need to define what marriage is, and what role government has in it. I will make the case that marriage has not meant the same thing throughout history and there are multiple versions of marriage today. I believe that a sensible and just definition of marriage would be as follows Marriage: A social contract between two individuals that unites their lives legally, economically, and emotionally. [1] Many believe that it should only be between a Man and Woman, but that is of course the topic we are discussing. I believe that this is the most accurate definition of marriage in today's society and I disagree that marriage should be defined as only heterosexual. Parenting My opponent disagrees with the notion that same sex couples can raise children just as well as heterosexual couples and he points to a recent study done by Mark Regnerus who argues that children raised by homosexual parents perform worse in almost every category when compared to children raised by heterosexual parents. There has been a fair amount of criticism over this study, including the sampling of the children in question. Fifty-eight percent of those raised by moms who'd indicated a lesbian experience said their mother once left the household during their youth, and 14 percent said they'd spent time in foster care. [2] The study did not directly compare children of same sex couples who raised the child from birth (or adopted in infancy), with children of heterosexual couples raised from birth. I agree that this study does present evidence to contradict the notion that there is no difference between children raised by same sex couples and those raised by heterosexual couples, however it does not in my opinion give merit to the notion that same sex couples should not be allowed to raise children on the basis that single parents and divorced parents can still raise children. Why Recognize Homosexual Marriage? My opponent does raise a valid question, why should homosexual marriage be recognized? He also claims that it is a privilege for homosexuals but a right for heterosexuals on the basis that homosexuals cannot procreate with each other. If anyone reading is unaware of the definition of procreation it is producing children. So, we must then ask another question. Is marriage an institution created and maintained for one reason, producing and caring for children? Is that the only reason to be married? What about married couples who do not want to or are unable to have children? I believe that these questions are strongly tied together if one uses the procreation argument to justify denying consenting adults from receiving a legal document identifying them as being married. So, let us answer the question as to why homosexual marriage should be recognized. Constitutional: The US constitution protects one's liberty and equality. The 1978 trial Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur stated, "Freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause. " It is true that this court case was not about SSM, but as with most court rulings the result effects more than the specific case it was judging. Harmful when illegal: Many probably don't imagine what it is like to be told that even though you are in love with a person and wish to be together for the rest of your lives but being told by society and the government that your relationship is not recognizable. I am sure that my opponent will disagree with this comparison, but I do find it similar to when African Americans and Caucasians were not allowed to marry each other. I agree there are differences, but the emotional impact felt by couples of different ethnicities who were told they could never marry each other is felt just as heavily by homosexual couples being told their commitment to each other will never be recognized. Adoption: My opponent feels strongly about not allowing same sex couples to raise children, but given the number of children in foster homes (near 470,000) shouldn't they be able to be adopted into a family with two same sex parents who will love them and care for them? No adverse effect on heterosexual marriage: If we are going to ask "why recognize SSM? " we should also ask "why not recognize SSM" A study in 2009 (not very outdated) studied the impact on heterosexual marriage in states that allow SSM and found that there was no adverse effect on marriage, divorce, abortion rates, or children born out of wedlock [5]. My opponent seems to be stating that to allow same sex couples to be married would make it more difficult for heterosexual couples to be married. This is a fallacy. I challenge all readers to imagine they were happily married, and a homosexual couple across the street marry each other, what would you no longer be allowed to do? Basic Right: My opponent stated that it is a right for heterosexual couples to be married; I believe that if it is a right to them it should be a right to homosexuals as well. When two people are married many things happen apart from a name change. Each individual is allowed to make life threatening decisions for the other or visit each other in the hospital. If a doctor were to tell the wife or husband of someone who was dying that they were not allowed to see them because they were not family, only married, there would be a great uproar. The same should be true with homosexual couples (there has been recent activity to make this legal in all states). Another important aspect of marriage is that it grants citizenship if the wife or husband is from another country. If SSM will never be legal, then I believe same sex civil unions should have all the same legal rights that marriage has. Summary My opponent so far has made a valid argument that we need to define what marriage is. He has also given evidence to support his claim that homosexual couples are not as good at parenting then heterosexual couples. I admit that there are challenges in two parents of the same gender raising a child, but does that mean that simply because something has an extra challenge that it should be prohibited? If the United States is indeed a country based on freedom and equal rights, then to deny someone the ability to do what most others in the country can do simply because of who they is bigoted. 1. . http://marriage.about.com... 2. . http://www.huffingtonpost.com... 3. . http://gaymarriage.procon.org... 4. . http://www.childrenunitingnations.org... 5. Laura Langbein and Mark A. Yost, Jr. , "Same-Sex Marriage and Negative Externalities," Social Science Quarterly, June 2009