It should be legal for non-religious homosexuals to marry people of the same gender.

The resolution for me to disprove is as follows: "It should be legal for non-religious homosexuals to marry people of the same gender. " *SCOPE OF THE DEBATE* Although my opponent has defined the term "legal", I find that the definition is too broad to precisely convey the meaning of my opponent's contention. On the face of it, there are two possible meanings. 1) Customary marriage between non-religious homoesexuals and people of the same gender should not be penalised by law; 2) The law should allow and in fact sanction the existence of a marriage between non-religious homosexuals and people of the same gender. The differnce between these two contentions is that the former involves the lack prohibition by law of the said marriages while the latter involves a recognition by law of marriages between non-religious homosexuals and persons of the same gender. By extension, the latter proposition would also mean that such individuals could legally get married by a properly authorised civil celebrant operating under the legislation of the State in question. For the purposes of this debate, I understand that it is the latter (second) contention that my opponent seeks to prove. I have made that conclusion based on the entirety of his argument. *COUNTER-ARGUMENT* Having said all of the above, I am opposed to either of the two contentions. The proposition (in either of the two abovementioned forms) as it stands cannot be sustained as it is unfair, discriminatory and against the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. 1. The First Amendment prohibits the State (or the United States) from discriminating on the grounds of religion. Any law allowing "non-religious homosexuals to marry people of the same gender" would in itself be discriminatory on the grounds of religion and therefore would offend against the First Amendment. An observant critic might at this point argue that the Constitution should or could be amended so as to allow the passage of the law proposed by my opponent. Naturally I would be equally opposed to that course. Freedom of religion is a fundamental right in today's society and discrimination against religious homosexuals in favour of non-religious homosexuals would be in breach of that very important, fundamental principle of natural justice. My opponet's own argument is centred around the premise of equality and fairness. He argues that homosexual people are "equal in every aspect" (Contention 1). Arguably therefore a dfferential legal treatment of homosexuals based on their religious beliefs would be against that very contention. It would have the result that homosexuals are not treated in an equal manner with heterosexuals, since heterosexuals are legally allowed to marry irrespective of their religious beliefs. 2. The proposition cannot be sustained as it proposes the passage of a law that would be unfair and discriminatory in nature as it would discriminate against people who are heterosexual and bisexual. While some might think that a heterosexual person might not have a desire to marry a person of the same gender, their supposed wishes are a matter for their own conscience and should not give rise to legal prohibition/discrimination at law. This goes even further when the argument is extended to bisexual people. Bisexual people are those who are sexually and emotionally attracted to people of both genders. To discriminate against them in favour of homsexuals would be unfair and would constitute a denial of natural justice. Indeed, such discrimination would fly in the face of my opponent's own contention that homosexuals are "equal in every aspect" (Contention 1). If, as my opponent claims, they are equal in every aspect then any proposition that they deserve better (as opposed to equal) treatment by law than bisexuals and heterosexuals simply could not stand and would contradict the very basis of my opponent's own argument. For the above reasons I am opposed to any such legislation as that proposed by my opponent's resolution. I look forward to my opponent's response.