Gay marriage should be legalised

So... I'll go ahead and use the argument I used on a previous debate where my opponent sadly forfeited.My CaseNote: Firstly, I would like to point out that I have nothing against homosexual individuals. I agree that if two men or two women love each other, they should be able to stay together. In fact my side on this debate really does not reflect my actual opinion. In this debate I am simply arguing that a union between two homosexual couples should not be referred to as marriage.Religious reasons. Now, I myself am not religious. However, gay marriage is not compatible with most religions. Just taking a look at Christianity, we can see that The Catholic Church, Presbyterian Church, Islam, United Methodist Church, Southern Baptist Convention, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, National Association of Evangelicals, and American Baptist Churches USA all oppose same-sex marriage. Now this opposition is a problem for two reasons. Firstly, churches who are against marriage between homosexuals are often pressured into, or even forced to marry gay individuals when same-sex marriage is legal. This is exactly what happened in Danbury, U.K. Two gay men who were already millionaires sued their church in attempt to force their church to perform a wedding ceremony. They wanted to challenge the laws that allowed religious organizations to opt out of marrying homosexuals (The Libertarian Republic). My second reason has to do with tax dollars. The congressional budget office (1) notes that "the cost to the federal government of extending employment benefits to same-sex domestic partners of certain federal employees (making no mention of additional costs such as Social Security and inheritance taxes) would be $596 million in mandatory spending and $302 million in discretionary spending between 2010 and 2019." If these benefits are in the name of marriage rather than civil unions religious individual's taxes will be going to a cause that they do not necessarily believe in.Gay marriage has actually been referred to as the detriment of homosexual culture.This argument is an interesting one. Dr. Lee Badget (2) emphasizes that "marriage means adopting heterosexual forms of family and giving up distinctively gay family forms and perhaps even gay and lesbian culture." Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual pride is a big deal. By removing the gap between homosexuals and heterosexuals, some may claim that LGBT culture will come to an end. With this argument, I am advocating for civil unions. I do believe that gay individuals should get the same opportunities as straight individuals. These opportunities just shouldn't come with the name of marriage. Really if you think about it, gay marriage can do the same thing to heterosexual culture. Badget goes on to say that, "In particular, they worry that opening up marriage poses a threat to children by diminishing heterosexual couples’ desire to marry, thereby reducing parents’ commitment and attention to child rearing." Here it is shown that making gay marriage legal could actually harm homosexual/heterosexual culture, which is something that ought to be preserved.Marriage itself is becoming outdated. Many consider it sexist/oppressive.Legalizing gay marriage brings more types of marriages to the plate. In July 1969, the Gay Liberation Front (3) in New York said, "We expose the institution of marriage as one of the most insidious and basic sustainers of the system. The family is the microcosm of oppression." This is a belief shared by many heterosexuals as well. Looking at my argument above, we can also see that the quality of marriage and the culture of both gay and straight individuals will be negatively impacted by the legalization of same sex-marriage. Psychology Today published an article that showed how married individuals actually become increasingly less happy after they make the decision to get married. The article also showed that married people feel isolated or alone more often. The legalization of gay marriage will result in more couples getting married, which may not actually be a good thing.(1) http://gaymarriage.procon.org...(2) M.V. Lee Badgett, PhD, When Gay People Get Married, 2009(3) Paula Ettelbrick, "Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?," OUT/LOOK National Gay and Lesbian Quarterly, Fall 1989Opponent's ArgumentsDiscriminationDiscrimination- the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people (Merriam-Webster)It is important to observe that gay individuals can obtain the benefits traditionally given through marriage in ways other than marriage. I do advocate for civil unions (and any other way of obtaining rights other than marriage) Look at my first point. Tax dollars go towards benefits for marriages/domestic partnerships/civil unions. If gay individuals benefits are in the name of marriage, it is unfair to people who believe being gay is immoral because their tax dollars are going towards something they believe is wrong. Since homosexuals can still get such rights outside of marriage, not allowing them to marry cannot be considered discrimination.Rights and CelebrationsI explained above that gay individuals can enjoy rights through domestic partnerships/civil unions. As for celebrations, it is not uncommon for homosexuals to celebrate their domestic partnerships or civil unions just as heterosexuals celebrate marriage. Homosexuals are not being deprived of such events.