Gay marriages should be federally legalized in the United States.

I am somewhat confused, as the title of the debate is significantly different than the substance of your opening statement. However, since the issue of gay marriage does hinge somewhat upon the issues you raised in your opening argument, I think it makes an appropriate beginning. For the sake of clarity, though, the topic isn't whether or not gay marriages should be legalized, but whether or not homosexuality is morally acceptable. Legality is a secondary issue. Please tell me if I'm mistaken. I would like to begin by saying that I am an angry and violent person. I was born that way, it wasn't a choice. Therefore, it's okay. Don't you dare judge me for it, it's just natural. The above paragraph is an illustration of the fact that something cannot be justified as acceptable simply by virtue of being "natural." In addition to "homosexuality," the animal kingdom displays a number of other behaviors, including polygamy, homicide, patricide, fratricide, incest, and rape. By your reasoning, all of the above should be considered acceptable because they are "natural." This is, of course, absurd. Since you have quoted scripture in order to condemn those who would dare to say that homosexuality is wrong, and since you express outrage that some people would "distort" scripture to do so, I assume that you have some respect for the Bible as a moral compass. This is an excellent starting point, as neither "nature" nor pure reason serve as a legitimate basis for a moral standard. First, I am not judging anyone. I have no idea what kind of person you are, or of the contents of your heart are. I do, however, know that homosexuality is immoral, based on the same Bible you quoted. Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Romans 1:24-47 "Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." In the first verse, we see explicitly that homosexuality is an abomination. In the second, we see much the same thing, except that this verse essentially calls homosexuality a mental illness, and points to venereal diseases as confirmation of the immorality of that lifestyle. It may also be a prophetic reference to the spread of AIDs. Whatever the case, the message is clear: homosexuality is wrong. Notwithstanding, there are MANY other sins described in the Bible, and I would by lying if I told you that I was not guilty of many, if not most of them. The Bible says that he who is guilty of breaking one of the commandments is guilty of the whole (James 2:10.) In other words, we are all equally guilty. However, none of this serves as a justification for sin. We are told to repent (and be baptized) for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38.) The word repent means to turn away from a current path or direction. We see this principle when Jesus forgave the adulteress who was brought to her to be stoned, when he said "go and sin no more." What is important to remember is that what we often see as "rules" and "commandments" in the Bible are really there for our benefit. While most people erroneously base their morality on whether or not a particular act causes other people harm, the morality of the Bible was given by God to ensure not only that we don't harm others, but that we don't harm ourselves, and that we live happy, fulfilled lives as a result. The point of these verses isn't to condemn people like yourself to hell, but to give you the opportunity to turn away from these behaviors to your own benefit. You may reply that you don't want to change, that you're happy just the way you are, to which I would reply that nobody WANTS to change. It is often a difficult and painful process. However, we must simply have faith that God knows what's best for us, and that if we surrender a fault or sinful behavior, God will replace it with a lasting peace and joy which no amount of worldly pleasure can rival. Now that I've touched on the Biblical side of things, I will return to the scientific side. I thought I would point out that two of the sources for which you provided links actually weaken your case. The second link, states the exact opposite of what you're trying to prove, saying that homosexuality, contrary to the view presented by the gay and lesbian community, is not natural. The third link states that "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation." In other words, for every link you provided which says homosexuality is natural, I could, if I had the time, find one which challenges that hypothesis. There is no scientific consensus on the issue. There are, however, at least one very sound scientific reason to believe that homosexuality is not natural, at least not entirely. This is the force of natural selection. Natural selection, as I'm sure we're all aware, is differential reproductive success (At least, that's the definition given in my biology text book from last quarter.) Obviously if an organism doesn't pass on its genetic information, that information will disappear from a population's gene pool. It should be equally obvious that while homosexuals can and often do reproduce (although I think the number that do is diminishing somewhat now that people aren't as afraid to "come out of the closet as it were) their differential reproductive success is heavily outweighed by heterosexuals. Thus, if a "gay gene" does or ever did exist, it would have or will disappear from the gene pool in very, very short order. Some have proposed that a homosexual gene could survive in recessive form in heterozygous individuals. Unfortunately, this will still result in the elimination of the gay allele over time, as every instance of a homozygous dominant individual will be selected against, resulting in a drop of the total frequency of the allele until only one individual possesses the recessive trait. Thus, not only does is the issue over whether homosexuality is natural or not irrelevant to the question of its morality, there are sound scientific reasons to believe that it cannot possibly be natural. It is more probably (although there is an ongoing debate in the scientific community) an abnormality, the result of environmental factors. This view of homosexuality as pathological is supported by the self-destructive nature of homosexual activity, which severely increases the risk of AIDS. If it is pathological, and the likelihood is high, then regardless of how loving homosexual parents may be, it cannot be considered responsible to allow homosexual couples to adopt. Forgive me, but if God had wanted homosexuals to have kids... Finally we arrive at whether or not homosexual marriages should be legalized. Once again, if homosexuality is pathological, writing a law giving them the ability to marry one another would be a bit like writing a law allowing schizophrenics to marry each other.