Gay Marriage

Here's my defense against my opponent's rebuttals. A. It's Not A ChoiceMy opponent never explains why it doesn't make sense to be born gay or the exact scientific proof that supposedly states that there is no "gay gene". However, studies on twins show opposite results. "Evidence from independent research groups who studied twins shows that genetic factors explain about 25-30% of the differences between people in sexual orientation (heterosexual, gay, lesbian, and bisexual). Twin studies are a first look into the genetics of a trait and tell us that there are such things as 'genes for sexual orientation'... Three gene finding studies showed that gay brothers share genetic markers on the X chromosome; the most recent study also found shared markers on chromosome 8. This latest research overcomes the problems of three prior studies which did not find the same results." [1]As for "turning gay", we have no idea what that person has gone through, their psyche, their external struggles, etc. They could be hiding it from their family or maybe they just don't want to accept it until much later. B. EqualityJust because the definition of marriage has limited exclusively to a man and woman for years, that doesn't mean that it should stay the same forever. For example, in 2013 the FBI expanded the definition of rape to apply to men and women. [2] But we have to keep the outdated definition, right? Times change and sometimes we need to redefine terms to fit the way we live today. Actually, there are very few negative effects of polyamory, besides jealousy between partners. [3] As long as all parties consent and it's a happy and healthy relationship, then it should be fine. Then again, this isn't an argument about polygamist, so I'll move on. Believe it or not, not all couples can or want to have children, regardless of orientation. Show is a straight relationship "a friendship" if they don't have children? How is this different from a gay couple who don't have kids? C. Separation of Church and StateThis argument is a bare assertion. Is there a little check list of everything natural and unnatural as far as marriage is concerned? We have no way of enforcing "nature's law" to the fullest. For example: "When Thomas Jefferson wrote:"Laws of Nature" into the Declaration of independence, he was referring to an Enlightenment concept deeply rooted in Western philosophy. In later writings, Jefferson elaborated:'Nature has written her moral laws on the head and heart of every rational and honest man, where man may read them for himself. If ever you are about to say anything amiss, or to do anything wrong, consider beforehand you will feel something within you which will tell you it is wrong, and ought not to be said or done. This is your conscience, and be sure and obey it... Conscience is the only sure clue which will eternally guide a man clear of all his doubts and inconsistencies.'" [4]The concept of right and wrong is very subjective, like I said my rebuttals against my opponent. Morals aren't the same for everyone, believe it or not. D. Adoption IncreaseIn what way? Reaserch by Boston University seems to point the other way. The best study so far, Siegel tells BU Today, is the National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study, begun in 1986. The study has followed 154 lesbian mothers and recently checked in on 78 adolescent children, comparing the mothers’ and kids’ self-reported status against national standardized samples."The lesbian mothers’ reports of their children 'indicated that they had high levels of social, school/academic, and total competence and fewer social problems, rule-breaking, and aggressive and externalizing behavior compared with their age-matched counterparts,' Siegel and Perrin write. If you might expect parents to say that, consider their kids’ testimony: 'The self-reported quality of life of the adolescents in this sample was similar to that reported by a comparable sample of adolescents with heterosexual parents.'" [5]Again, the claim of "rare adoption increase in homosexual relationships" is another bare assertion with no evidence to support it. I explained this is my opening statements with the quote on the number of children not adopted. Thank you for the debate. You may waive the last round, like I said in the rules. Best of luck. Good bye. Citations[1]https://www.theguardian.com...[2]http://www.slate.com...[3]https://www.psychologytoday.com...[4]http://www.chivalrynow.net...[5]http://www.bu.edu...