Gay Marriage

Thank you for accepting my challenge... To initiate my rebuttal, I will first address your claim "not allowing gay couples to be married is not discrimination by any means" First, let's define the term 'discrimination' Discrimination - 1. an act or instance of discriminating, or of making a distinction. 2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit. 3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment http://dictionary.reference.com... In this particular case, the distinction being made is in reference to the both the gender and sexual orientations of the individuals involved. You are saying "You cannot get married, because you are not like me" which in this case would be classified as discrimination. If we were to look at this from a similar perspective (ie a couple with different ethnic backgrounds), this would also be classified as discrimination. Not allowing couples to marry because of their biological sex is in fact discriminatory by definition and is no less discriminatory than not allowing couples to marry because of their ethnicity. My sources regarding gender and sex discrimination laws are below, they also apply to gays and lesbians. Gender and Sex Discrimination Laws: http://www.eeoc.gov... Marriage is a legally, religiously, or socially sanctioned union of persons who commit to one another, forming a familial and economic bond. However, in the United States, marriage is more of a legal process. Couples who commit to marriage must sign a legally binding marriage contract which then grants them certain benefits that are only given to those under said contract who have established some sort of bond or commitment to one another. Obviously the government IS interested in the personal relationships of two people, because if they weren't, there would be no need for a legally binding contract. Marriage is far from ever being a 'private' issue. No legal matters are private if the government is involved. And as far as the government is concerned, the relationship between the two people involved is essential when considering whether or not they are allowed to be married in some cases which is why American citizens who choose marry immigrants must go through a process of "legitimization" of their relationship before their spouse can become a fully recognized U.S. citizen. Definition of Marriage: http://dictionary.reference.com... For Immigration purposes: http://www.immihelp.com... By claiming "The government recognizes marriage between man and woman because despite the private relationship they have, their relationship still has a natural link to children to be loved by their mother and father. " you are implying 1. Gay people are not capable of having, loving or raising children, and 2. Having children is some sort of requirement in marriage. Both are false. Gay couples are just as capable of raising and loving their children as any heterosexual couple. Not all heterosexual parents are 'loving' parents either. And when discussing marriage, whether or not you believe homosexuals should raise children is irrelevant. Having children is not a requirement for marriage. There are heterosexual couples who do not have children, either by choice, due to infertility or age and gay couples that do in fact raise children together. It is not the government's job to "promote" a hetero normative environment. That, once again, is discrimination. Gay couples marrying and raising children does not somehow hinder or deteriorate the survival of a society. And by saying it is acceptable for the government to "promote" this, you thereby go against your own claim that "the government could care less about what people do with their private lives." because according to you, that is the exact opposite. Regardless, one cannot "promote" heterosexuality. Whether or not gay couples are allowed to marry, that has no impact on the sexual orientation, personal lives or traditional values of other people. You add on by claiming "In addition, homosexuals can still be married, just like heterosexuals, regardless of sexual orientation." I assume by "married" you mean to the opposite sex, correct? Allow me to show you the error in that statement. Homosexuals are romantically/sexually attracted to the same sex, not the opposite. To say it is acceptable for a gay man to marry a woman is illogical and promotes dishonesty. What purpose does that serve and how does that benefit the couple involved? A gay man is incapable of falling in love with and having a healthy sexual relationship with a woman if he is not attracted to her. So why would a person want to marry someone if it only leads to conflict, stress, possibly adultery and eventually divorce. It would be ridiculous to think that is a good idea. You go on to claim "To say homosexuals are discriminated against would be nearly the same as saying any couple that is currently excluded from marriage is being discriminated against." And what couples would that be exactly? Please specify in detail. "Now that we understand the government"s role in marriage we can understand that there is no unjust discrimination going against any couple who cannot be married." No disrespect intended but clearly you do not exactly know the government's role in marriage. And none of your arguments really proved that denying gay couples the right to marry is not classified as discrimination because it clearly is under legal definition. All of your major points consisted of claims which implied that marriage is some sort of "heterosexual privilege" without any real evidence or logical argument against the legalization of same-sex marriage, only biased claims. All I really got from your argument was "Gays marrying is bad for families and society because I say so and it's not discrimination because I say so and they shouldn't marry because I say so" without any evidence or specifications, which to me is not a valid argument at all. Please present an argument against the legalization of same-sex marriage that is more direct and provide evidence to support your claims. I await your response.