Same-sex marriage (SSM) Should Be Legal in the USA

I have to say, I greatly enjoyed it. Although we disagree immensely, you have shown great conduct and great respect thus far. Ladies and gentlemen, I first wish to point out that my opponent's definition of marriage is circular: Marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman, therefore SSM=/=Marriage. This begs the question, "Why would one could ever debate on this topic? " I'll tell you why, because tehre IS a debate set up on this, doesn't mean that his definition cannot be, well, definitive? "Appeals to equality side, what compelling reason does the state have in recognizing a homosexual relationship? "Ladies and gents, please direct your attention to the Iowa supreme court that said, "The right for a gay and lesbian to marry someone of the opposite sex is NO RIGHT AT ALL" (Paraphrased). Homosexuals do promote stability and committed relationships, both from the symbolism of formal recognition of the union and also from encouragement set up for marriage in tax code & law, like lower tax rate for married couples, and home ownership. More opportunities to provide stable homes and bring children up for adoption is a great reason to allow for SSM! Fact: There are over 2,000 children waiting to be adopted [1]. If a gay couple can provide a safe, loving, and caring home; why should that right be taken from them? "Using your definition of marriage, why should the state recognize it at all? "It promotes stability and family. Using your definiton of marriage, why should the state allow and promote heterosexual marriage?1. I think I now understand what you mean. Thank you for clarifying.2. Dropped by con.3. My opponent still continues to think that because straights can produce then they have to be the only ones given the opportunity to marry. However, let's take this into a different perspective, should we then deny senior citizens the right to marry because they do not reproduce? Should we not allow abstinence couples from getting married? What are the benifits of society that gay people can bring? The children who are awaiting adoption will have a greater chance at being adopted with more people wanting children from the gay and lesbian side. Apparently, my opponent shows 0 concern to overpopulation.4. Lesser value to whom? Under what circumstances do you make that claim? To us, gay marriage is as equal value as heterosexual couples.5. What I'm trying to say is that what or whom does SSM hurt? No-one! It should be up to the couple to decide who gets married--NOT the state. Marriage is a Universal RightMy opponent seems to be contradicting himself. Is marriage for procreation or procreation in type? Universal Declaration. .. I have already explained in my previous argument. My opponent is willingly deciptive. How is the UDHR enforced then? Opponent's Questions1. Appeals to equality aside, what compelling reason does the state have in recognizing a homossexual relationship? This is rather a good question. Here are my reasons:1. The same benfitis that apply to a man-woman marriage will apply to SSM2. Gay couples will now be able to adopt and thus allow children from broken homes, orphanages and awaiting adoption to be adopted into safe and loving homes2. Do homosexual relationships provide any uniqyue enefits to society? Yes.3. Using your definition of marriage, why should the state recognize it at all? It promotes stability. Ladies and gents, to whom or what is Same-sex marraige hurting? Should we allow this discrimination to continue? Here is a question for everyone, why should procreational types be the only thing that matter in a relationship? If a homosexual couple can provide a safe environment and a loving home, should they be denied that right? For the sake or equal rights and for the sake of humanity, please vote pro! Sources:1. . http://www.childwelfare.gov...;