Equality, gay marriage

I haven't been on this site in quite a while, but in light of the recent federal legalization of gay marriage, I would be more than happy to accept and discuss this topic. Since Pro has not outlined any specific parameters regarding the debate structure and format, I will jump right into acknowledging the resolution question and providing rebuttals to the two main points presented. Question: "Is equality really what lgbt is fighting for, or is it a change of the upper hand? ""Upper hand" is defined as having a mastery or control over something that is consequently placed at a disadvantage (1). Therefore, it can be inferred that Pro's claim asserts that citizens who identify as LGBT are seeking a type of mastery and control over the church as well as over their opponents, subsequently creating a disadvantage. 1) "Lgbt isn't just taking their right to marriage, they are trying to have marriage in a church (majority of which disagree with gay marriage). This is an attempt to belittle the churches rights to their beliefs. "This is, first of all, a blanket statement that is not necessarily applicable to all LGBT citizens. A number of LGBT couples have partaken in non-religious ceremonies in order to officialize their marriage (2). Therefore, Pro's description of LGBT citizens' intentions are inaccurate, vague, and overtly generalized. Furthermore, for the LGBT couples who do wish to wed under religious ceremonies in churches, Pro has no evidence to substantiate whether or not their intentions are that of belittling as opposed to that of wanting equal opportunities that their heterosexual counterparts currently have as well as fulfilling personal and religious wants (3). Until Pro provides further evidence that LGBT couples' ultimate intent is to disadvantage and infringe on the rights of religious institutions, this claim vilifies LGBT citizens and creates unfair bias. 2) "Anyone who does not support gay marriage is labelled bigoted and intolerant and ignorant. This is hypocrisy in itself because they are belittling the right to opinion and freedom of speech. Meanwhile they say their rights aren't being allowed and its not just. "Pro makes yet another blanket statement claiming that all who do not support gay marriage are labeled as bigoted, intolerant, and ignorant. This generalization over-simplifies the various perceptions and attitudes of and towards anti-gay sentiments (4), which, yet again, vilifies and creates unfair bias against LGBT citizens. Furthermore, this generalization confuses Pro's main point of discussion since there individuals who disagree with anti-gay sentiments and yet do not identify as LGBT (5). Therefore, despite Pro's initial resolution focusing on LGBT citizens, non-LGBT citizens are referenced nevertheless, which is an irrelevant point to the topic. Pro continues on to describe this opposition to anti-gay sentiments as hypocritical and a breach of the freedom of speech clause. If the freedom of speech clause is correctly understood and interpreted to mean that citizens have the right to express opinions freely without any governmental intervention, we can conclude that, based on Pro's previous claim, LGBT citizens are breaching no such rights of those who do not support gay marriage (6). Pro should be aware that voicing criticism against anti-gay sentiments is not the equivalent to legally barring a group from certain privileges, such as marriage, that another group has access to, which is indeed an infringement on civil rights (7). Pro should also be aware that societal criticism is not the equivalent to censorship, and that, under the freedom of speech clause, LGBT citizens and supporters have every much right to express their criticisms and opinions as non-LGBT supporters and anti-gay citizens have the right to express theirs. End of first round rebuttals. I look forward to Pro's responses. ---------Sources:1) . http://www.merriam-webster.com...2) . http://www.pewforum.org...3) . http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu...4) . http://www.norc.org...5) . http://www.uas.alaska.edu...6) . https://www.law.cornell.edu...7) . http://www.businessinsider.com...